Curt Doolittle

Theme: Measurement

  • Q: What Do You Mean by ‘Serialization’?

    Oct 25, 2019, 12:30 PM “CURT, WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY ‘SERIALIZATION’?” (important)

    —“What is serialization?”—Duke Newcomb

    (From the P-Method of “Disambiguation, Serialization, and Operationalization”) Before using a term, define the term, by researching the etymology of the term (history), then collecting all synonyms and antonyms (and etymology) and organizing them into one or more series by common properties. We use serialization to force disambiguation between terms that appear similar but are not. This is how we converted common language into a system of measurement, and expose our errors, and our ignorance, and most sophisms whether a deceit-fallacy, ideal-verbal, pseudoscientific-magical, or supernatural-occult Examples using ‘True’: DUE DILIGENCE AS CONSTANT RELATION tautologically true, idealistically true, testimonially(really) true, honestly true, impulsively true. and: DECIDABILITY AS CONSTANT RELATION incomprehensible, comprehensible(understandable), agreement(on understanding), preferential(for me), good(mutually preferential), testimonially true (decidable); ideally true(logically), or tautologically true(identical). Some Other Examples on our site, particularly after item seven: https://propertarianinstitute.com/basic-concepts/the-cheat-sheet/ It’s sort of like (exactly like) creating a number line, or a series of points on a line. The number line creates a system of measurement by some underlying constant relation (in the case of numbers, position), and then points on a line which test conformity to the constant relation (constant positional relation between n-dimensional positions. Operationalism is a bit harder: writing complete sentences as transactions with a consistent point of view, in ePrime. Testimonial Operationalism is a bit harder: writing those same complete sentences as promissory observations, Operationalism into Acquisition, Property-in-toto, and Reciprocity is a bit harder. This requires you start using economics of human behavior. But once you get there by combining serialization, operationalism, and acquisitionism, you have the formal logic of all human language – a universal commensurable system of measurement for human speech. The Grammars just provide a sort of equivalent to the table of fundamental particles, the periodic table of the elements, the dimensions of geometry, for language, and with the Grammars you can learn rather easily This is why I usually refer to the P-Method as the ‘Geometry of Thought”. Because just as Descartes restored mathematics to geometry, I’m restoring language to geometry: real (aristotle), constant relations(engineering), instead of ideal (platonic) constant relations, or supernatural(semitic) constant relations (astrology). However this big picture of the differences caused by the civilizational origins of their thought and it’s incorporation into the their rationalizations and language, and metaphycis,a nd habits, is invisible to almost everyone. I just write it here so the few who might want to see that pattern can discover it. -Curt

  • The Relationship Between Math, Set Logic, P-Logic

    (important)(core)(learning opportunity) —“So, [propertarianism uses] a fixed grammar which diagrams or “measures,” as you say, how far a use of a particular word is from the precise meaning of the term in propertarian parlance. I’m guessing there has to be a reason to do this rather than give a straightforward definition like all non-initial words in a good math textbook. I’m guessing it has to do with the fact the same term takes on slightly different meaning, in essence less proximity to the initial described point on the grammar number line, as it ventures through different layers of the analytical process of operationalization. Rather than outright avoid some multiplicity of meaning, this schema just keeps track of it. To me, in my set theoretic way of thinking, this makes a word a set of definitions, and context indexes on it to determines the cardinality of the set, with each element being mapped to the number line used.”— Duke Newcomb We have a set of common P-definitions, all in series, and a glossary of individual terms as well as series – and there aren’t that many of the core definitions. (i was surprised) But that doesn’t mean we don’t need to explain how to do it to ANY term in order to FALSIFY others errors, biases, and deceits. So in keeping with the migration from verbalisms (associations), to mathematics (sets), to operations (actions), P is written like a PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE not like mathematics (sets). And so we produce functions in operational prose, not scale independent logic in symbolic prose – and I do it for a very good reason: the catastrophic failure of mathematics in economics, and in particular the divergence of mathematics and economics, rather than convergence. And that is because economics of consumption has replace morality in politics, and because it is possible to restore consumption with tests of changes in the state of capital vs consumption, thereby ending hyperconsumption, including of genetic, social, institutional, cultural and civilizational capital. I think you are trying to generalize into symbolics (sets) and I’m trying to reverse that ‘error’ by return to geometry similarly to how descartes restored aristotelian thought to europe by restoring mathematics to ‘geometry’ from ‘sets’ and scriptural and textual interpretation. For example, in cantor(sets) there are multiple infinities (impossible). However under babbage(gears) there are only different rates of production of positional names (operations). Why did mathematicians choose cantor over babbage? Why do we call the square root of two a number, when it is but the name of a function? And to take that forward, I think you are still trying prove (construct, justify) an argument under law, and my emphasis is falsification of the platonic sophisms in all fields, including mathematics, as well as more importantly, the abrahamic deceits of judaism, christianity, islam, Boasian, Freudian, Marxism, feminism, postmodernism, and the general feminine and semitic technique of disempowerment of those with agency by the continuous toppling of apple carts for no other reason than undermining the production of order (meaning any form of judgement by measurement) that would deny them the use of interpersonal persuasion and sexual temptation, and false promise to obtain good, services, information, opportunity, and status, without engaging in reciprocity. As such I know you’re deep into these subjects and you’re (omg thank you) smart, but it is far harder to move from construction with clay to make an argument, to sculpting of stone to reveal what’s inside it than you’d think. It is very hard. If it wasn’t very hard – because justification using appeal to moral intuition and habit, norm, tradition, and metaphysical presumption is natural, ancient, and saturated in the environment – someone would have done it earlier. I just spend a lot of time on both programming, artificial intelligence, economics, and law. And I (correctly as did Minsky) saw programming as an evolutionary leap in logics for that reason, moving logics out of language and restoring them to actions. The reality is that justification is cheap. Falsification is expensive. And not only have we only had a few centuries to adapt to our development of instrumentation and record keeping that is beyond human scale, So P Isn’t just an improved means of doing what we do today in more strictly constructed form, it allows us to take the common law system and to extended it to ALL false and irreciprocal speech made in public, to the public, in matters public. In other words, P allows us to outlaw every single aspect of leftism because it is all dependent upon fraud in order to obscure their thefts, necessitated by their moral envy, of higher status (sexual, social, economic, political military market value), and the cost of suppressing their impulses in order to develop agency in order to raise those market values that can be raised by one’s development of agency thru training. In other words, they must engage in fraud to obscure thefts, and prevent order, which creates measurement and accountability, so that they can compensate for their bad luck in the genetic lottery whose possibilities were created by the rather poor judgement of their ancestors – at least over no less than the past six generations. P allows us to convert from free speech to free truthful and reciprocal speech, where truthful means ‘what I can testify to’. This cuts the industrialization of lying made possible by the industrial revolution’s discount on production of information, and the mass distribution of false promise, undermining, and deceit by sophistry and pseudoscience by the marxists, postmodernists, and feminists. So while you are correct that there is temporally complete vocabulary available it is only temporally complete. And while we can adhere to that, we cannot operationalize and expose the thefts of the enemy, without the tools of doing so. So it’s more like mathematics, in that we continuously evolve new means of proof (tests of the possibility of measurement given scale independence (generalization of rules of measurement), limits (to compensate for undecidability of precision in scale independence) and the ‘presumption’ of the excluded middle necessary under scale independence – yet we keep discovering patterns and new means of deduction, so that we can never state mathematics is ‘complete’ (other than at some primitive dimensional scale). Math is just a very simple language of only one constant relation (position). All other languages from the first order logic on up contain more than one constant relation. But all languages are the same – the construction of a set of constant relations that another understands (agrees to, contracts to) and due diligence removing the possible associations, inferences, and deductions that the contracting party might be misled by. I mean in similar vernacular, we contract with our intuition which must, like another person, be trained by our reason. (God I hope people can learn from this discussion because I haven’t found anyone else knowledgeable enough to have it with, where I have the opportunity to discuss it in discursive terms. You are making it possible to discuss the big ideas rather than how to lay individual bricks. Thank you. ) DEVELOPMENT OF RELEVANT GRAMMARS Platonic Mathematics = Sets and Ideals independent of time and cost. Written in balanced symbols. Operational Mathematics = Demonstrable Operations in time at cost. Written in programmatic language, where the verbs are some variation of addition. Operational Prose = writing programmatic algorithms where the verbs are human actions (additions to reality).

  • The Relationship Between Math, Set Logic, P-Logic

    (important)(core)(learning opportunity) —“So, [propertarianism uses] a fixed grammar which diagrams or “measures,” as you say, how far a use of a particular word is from the precise meaning of the term in propertarian parlance. I’m guessing there has to be a reason to do this rather than give a straightforward definition like all non-initial words in a good math textbook. I’m guessing it has to do with the fact the same term takes on slightly different meaning, in essence less proximity to the initial described point on the grammar number line, as it ventures through different layers of the analytical process of operationalization. Rather than outright avoid some multiplicity of meaning, this schema just keeps track of it. To me, in my set theoretic way of thinking, this makes a word a set of definitions, and context indexes on it to determines the cardinality of the set, with each element being mapped to the number line used.”— Duke Newcomb We have a set of common P-definitions, all in series, and a glossary of individual terms as well as series – and there aren’t that many of the core definitions. (i was surprised) But that doesn’t mean we don’t need to explain how to do it to ANY term in order to FALSIFY others errors, biases, and deceits. So in keeping with the migration from verbalisms (associations), to mathematics (sets), to operations (actions), P is written like a PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE not like mathematics (sets). And so we produce functions in operational prose, not scale independent logic in symbolic prose – and I do it for a very good reason: the catastrophic failure of mathematics in economics, and in particular the divergence of mathematics and economics, rather than convergence. And that is because economics of consumption has replace morality in politics, and because it is possible to restore consumption with tests of changes in the state of capital vs consumption, thereby ending hyperconsumption, including of genetic, social, institutional, cultural and civilizational capital. I think you are trying to generalize into symbolics (sets) and I’m trying to reverse that ‘error’ by return to geometry similarly to how descartes restored aristotelian thought to europe by restoring mathematics to ‘geometry’ from ‘sets’ and scriptural and textual interpretation. For example, in cantor(sets) there are multiple infinities (impossible). However under babbage(gears) there are only different rates of production of positional names (operations). Why did mathematicians choose cantor over babbage? Why do we call the square root of two a number, when it is but the name of a function? And to take that forward, I think you are still trying prove (construct, justify) an argument under law, and my emphasis is falsification of the platonic sophisms in all fields, including mathematics, as well as more importantly, the abrahamic deceits of judaism, christianity, islam, Boasian, Freudian, Marxism, feminism, postmodernism, and the general feminine and semitic technique of disempowerment of those with agency by the continuous toppling of apple carts for no other reason than undermining the production of order (meaning any form of judgement by measurement) that would deny them the use of interpersonal persuasion and sexual temptation, and false promise to obtain good, services, information, opportunity, and status, without engaging in reciprocity. As such I know you’re deep into these subjects and you’re (omg thank you) smart, but it is far harder to move from construction with clay to make an argument, to sculpting of stone to reveal what’s inside it than you’d think. It is very hard. If it wasn’t very hard – because justification using appeal to moral intuition and habit, norm, tradition, and metaphysical presumption is natural, ancient, and saturated in the environment – someone would have done it earlier. I just spend a lot of time on both programming, artificial intelligence, economics, and law. And I (correctly as did Minsky) saw programming as an evolutionary leap in logics for that reason, moving logics out of language and restoring them to actions. The reality is that justification is cheap. Falsification is expensive. And not only have we only had a few centuries to adapt to our development of instrumentation and record keeping that is beyond human scale, So P Isn’t just an improved means of doing what we do today in more strictly constructed form, it allows us to take the common law system and to extended it to ALL false and irreciprocal speech made in public, to the public, in matters public. In other words, P allows us to outlaw every single aspect of leftism because it is all dependent upon fraud in order to obscure their thefts, necessitated by their moral envy, of higher status (sexual, social, economic, political military market value), and the cost of suppressing their impulses in order to develop agency in order to raise those market values that can be raised by one’s development of agency thru training. In other words, they must engage in fraud to obscure thefts, and prevent order, which creates measurement and accountability, so that they can compensate for their bad luck in the genetic lottery whose possibilities were created by the rather poor judgement of their ancestors – at least over no less than the past six generations. P allows us to convert from free speech to free truthful and reciprocal speech, where truthful means ‘what I can testify to’. This cuts the industrialization of lying made possible by the industrial revolution’s discount on production of information, and the mass distribution of false promise, undermining, and deceit by sophistry and pseudoscience by the marxists, postmodernists, and feminists. So while you are correct that there is temporally complete vocabulary available it is only temporally complete. And while we can adhere to that, we cannot operationalize and expose the thefts of the enemy, without the tools of doing so. So it’s more like mathematics, in that we continuously evolve new means of proof (tests of the possibility of measurement given scale independence (generalization of rules of measurement), limits (to compensate for undecidability of precision in scale independence) and the ‘presumption’ of the excluded middle necessary under scale independence – yet we keep discovering patterns and new means of deduction, so that we can never state mathematics is ‘complete’ (other than at some primitive dimensional scale). Math is just a very simple language of only one constant relation (position). All other languages from the first order logic on up contain more than one constant relation. But all languages are the same – the construction of a set of constant relations that another understands (agrees to, contracts to) and due diligence removing the possible associations, inferences, and deductions that the contracting party might be misled by. I mean in similar vernacular, we contract with our intuition which must, like another person, be trained by our reason. (God I hope people can learn from this discussion because I haven’t found anyone else knowledgeable enough to have it with, where I have the opportunity to discuss it in discursive terms. You are making it possible to discuss the big ideas rather than how to lay individual bricks. Thank you. ) DEVELOPMENT OF RELEVANT GRAMMARS Platonic Mathematics = Sets and Ideals independent of time and cost. Written in balanced symbols. Operational Mathematics = Demonstrable Operations in time at cost. Written in programmatic language, where the verbs are some variation of addition. Operational Prose = writing programmatic algorithms where the verbs are human actions (additions to reality).

  • If You Want to Learn P

      Propertarianism is like Aristotelianism – it is a huge project that reforms much human thought especially logic, language, epistemology (knowledge), psychology, sociology, ethics, law, and politics.

    1. You can learn about our proposed constitution and it’s policies (it’s a lot, and you might have to learn a bit bout economics and the justice system but you can do it.)
    2. You can learn the Big History of the competition between civilizations and in particular between European and Semitic.(easy)
    3. You can learn why Europeans evolved faster than the rest, and developed the only truth telling, high trust, wealthy, advanced, technological, civilization in so short a span in the bronze, ancient, and modern worlds – except for our period of failure during the Abrahamic dark age. (relatively easy)
    4. You can learn a whole suite of the propertarian arguments (Takes some work)
    5. You can learn how to conduct propertarian arguments
      You can learn how to use the p-methodology (Not easy)
    6. And you can if you want to get into the foundations of the P-methodology, the completed scientific method, and logic and epistemology. (Hard)

    SO IF YOU WANT TO LEARN ANY OF THAT 1) you can use the site and read it. 2) you can follow along. 3) you can use my (Curt) friends list to contact and catch the attention of a mentor by asking for help: Alain, Martin, Bill, Luke, Brandon, Erik, Steve, Eli, …(there are a lot more) 4) you can take our course (if you are patient enough for me to slowly release content – and I mean slowly). The other folks are better teachers than I am. Really. By far.

  • If You Want to Learn P

      Propertarianism is like Aristotelianism – it is a huge project that reforms much human thought especially logic, language, epistemology (knowledge), psychology, sociology, ethics, law, and politics.

    1. You can learn about our proposed constitution and it’s policies (it’s a lot, and you might have to learn a bit bout economics and the justice system but you can do it.)
    2. You can learn the Big History of the competition between civilizations and in particular between European and Semitic.(easy)
    3. You can learn why Europeans evolved faster than the rest, and developed the only truth telling, high trust, wealthy, advanced, technological, civilization in so short a span in the bronze, ancient, and modern worlds – except for our period of failure during the Abrahamic dark age. (relatively easy)
    4. You can learn a whole suite of the propertarian arguments (Takes some work)
    5. You can learn how to conduct propertarian arguments
      You can learn how to use the p-methodology (Not easy)
    6. And you can if you want to get into the foundations of the P-methodology, the completed scientific method, and logic and epistemology. (Hard)

    SO IF YOU WANT TO LEARN ANY OF THAT 1) you can use the site and read it. 2) you can follow along. 3) you can use my (Curt) friends list to contact and catch the attention of a mentor by asking for help: Alain, Martin, Bill, Luke, Brandon, Erik, Steve, Eli, …(there are a lot more) 4) you can take our course (if you are patient enough for me to slowly release content – and I mean slowly). The other folks are better teachers than I am. Really. By far.

  • “The crazy notion that overlapping distributions can still have divergent centra

    —“The crazy notion that overlapping distributions can still have divergent central tendencies and dispersion. It’s almost as if statistical reasoning doesn’t stop at the door just because we want it to.”—Duke Newcomb

  • “The crazy notion that overlapping distributions can still have divergent centra

    —“The crazy notion that overlapping distributions can still have divergent central tendencies and dispersion. It’s almost as if statistical reasoning doesn’t stop at the door just because we want it to.”—Duke Newcomb

  • “The crazy notion that overlapping distributions can still have divergent centra

    —“The crazy notion that overlapping distributions can still have divergent central tendencies and dispersion. It’s almost as if statistical reasoning doesn’t stop at the door just because we want it to.”—Duke Newcomb

  • Value and Measurements Matter; the Economics of The Immoral; Your Time Should Matter

    (Editor Brandon Hayes, with multiple authors) We have some very serious issues with our economics and our economy as current: Plausible Bubbles (short list; none are ever sure, when one goes others follow or become hidden): Student Debt Credit Debt (That’s cards and lines from banks) Housing Commercial Real-estate Automobiles Healthcare State Pensions Federal Debt Crypto AND MORE!!! But, but, but…. Our economy is doing so well; ah, yeah sure, til it isn’t. Look we measure GDP and average income. Both of which have nothing to do with quality of life for individuals and everything to do with leveraging our position on the world financial stage. We run a fiat currency that has no corresponding tangible hard asset (like gold). And we love exaggerating (lying) about the financial shape we’re in [American’s do this personally]. When we measure and aim at growing something (like GDP) that doesn’t directly translate to well-being (measurements to be debated about), this arguably translates to more suffering, we have an immoral measure; as it doesn’t take morality nor mortality into consideration. It puts them on the back burner, favoring an ever-climbing number. {You can never stop chasing numbers; as numbers never stop running; money is a BAD aim.} Next, our traditional economic models are wrong. Nearly all economics is based on this ludicrous assumption of human behavior: “Rational choice theory: is an economic principle that assumes that individuals always make prudent and logical decisions that provide them with the highest amount of personal utility.” I studied economics and marketing in college [among other things] (I was a business major), even then this assumption was asinine. We teach marketing as psychological manipulation; meaning we teach to advertise to irrational agents because we KNOW for a fact they are not rational. To build models based on rational agents is moronic to the point of offense; and dangerous because it doesn’t predict anything properly. So far, without even scratching the surface of how complicated economics is at the scales we operate at, we have glaring errors in our framework. What could possibly happen, who could imagine things going array!?! < internet sarcasm. It’s time to change; it’s way past time to change; the next market correction is going to put people back on their heels; more over it’s going to knock people back on their asses. It’s time to wake up, pay attention. < repeated mantras

    What follows is a list of jobs that could be culled back 90%+: Anything that has to do with pushing paper: lawyer, accountant, financier, traders, stock brokers, administrators, legislatures, lobbyists, and so on. [You do nothing but create hurdles for others actually doing work; and we don’t need you.] Anything that is a net value loss: most dirty energy jobs (we should seek energy independence), anything in a cubical that requires a commute, anything sales related (stop selling us shit we don’t need nor do we want it [people just don’t know they don’t]), etc. Anything that’ll soon be replaced by technology: Driver of any sort, fast food of any sort, most store clerks and cashiers (see Amazon’s new walk-in and walk-out stores), lecturing (see youtube), etc. ^All this, rough and incomplete, and off the top of my head after only one cup of coffee. Look, we could pay people half their salaries to stay HOME and sort their family out, clean their communities up, and reduce the stress that the 9-5 lifestyle induces. And it would be better (more beneficial) than them showing up at work. We made a mistake during the last crash to bail out the banks (more crooks that ought to be out of jobs) we should have bailed out students and homeowners; it was our money and we gave it to the .001% and the government; have we not learned a god-damned thing? The economy of the future is based on local exchange, sustainable supply chains, and a reduction in excess movement of goods. It’s family centric, energy creating, and value added. It’s quality lifetime products not throw away plastic garbage; it’s centered around children and the future NOT me, me, me, now, now, now! That’s not getting us anywhere take a look around at the twilight zone reality in which you reside.

    Libertarians and an-caps you don’t have the answers; your approaches are as flawed as those in use currently and we don’t have the time, energy, nor the wherewithal for you to give it a whirl. Marxists; you’ve been so wrong and murdering millions for so long I have a hard time understanding why we even let you speak. “Let’s get this labor thing straight. Labor has no value other than under capitalism we can create a consumer out of the laborer which organizes the very fractional contribution of labor into large groups producing many complex parts, and the complex part provides the value. The profit on the price is required to organize others in this network. That’s the whole thing. If you’re ‘labor’ you aren’t ‘value’ to others, since none of us is productive enough to matter. What matters is multipliers, and labor isn’t one. Labor’s primary value lies in (a) you are at least self supporting because (b) as a slave you’re even less productive, and (c) as a barbarian you’re a parasite. The value is in organizing using incentives using prices and profits.” – Curt Doolittle

    Here I should square the circle of time. If your labor isn’t worth anything (and in and of itself, it isn’t) then your time is worth nothing to others; but it is worth EVERYTHING to you and it should be. You have one life [80 years old]; it’s roughly 700,000 hours; you’ll spend a 3rd of those sleeping, leaving you with 467,200 waking hours. If you’re spending a majority of YOUR waking hours working at something you hate, cut that out right now! You ought to value your own time above all else; BUT you can’t force others to value it nor pay you for it. You must create something with your time and offer it as fair value exchange. This is the only way to make your time worth anything to others. Just because you show up and do a job; doesn’t mean you’re adding anything of worth [it’s still very hard to find good employees, ask any employer]. Master something (anything) and make your time worthwhile. I have deep sympathy for people living currently; as I am one of them. I have no problems walking in other’s shoes. We have lied strategically to generations of humans (all the generations), we are at a unique point in time where the lies can be rooted out and have real light shown upon them. Many of them (lies) are painful to let go, but never in history has there been a lie that didn’t come back and take its toll in the future. Reality doesn’t take kindly to being mischaracterized!

  • Value and Measurements Matter; the Economics of The Immoral; Your Time Should Matter

    (Editor Brandon Hayes, with multiple authors) We have some very serious issues with our economics and our economy as current: Plausible Bubbles (short list; none are ever sure, when one goes others follow or become hidden): Student Debt Credit Debt (That’s cards and lines from banks) Housing Commercial Real-estate Automobiles Healthcare State Pensions Federal Debt Crypto AND MORE!!! But, but, but…. Our economy is doing so well; ah, yeah sure, til it isn’t. Look we measure GDP and average income. Both of which have nothing to do with quality of life for individuals and everything to do with leveraging our position on the world financial stage. We run a fiat currency that has no corresponding tangible hard asset (like gold). And we love exaggerating (lying) about the financial shape we’re in [American’s do this personally]. When we measure and aim at growing something (like GDP) that doesn’t directly translate to well-being (measurements to be debated about), this arguably translates to more suffering, we have an immoral measure; as it doesn’t take morality nor mortality into consideration. It puts them on the back burner, favoring an ever-climbing number. {You can never stop chasing numbers; as numbers never stop running; money is a BAD aim.} Next, our traditional economic models are wrong. Nearly all economics is based on this ludicrous assumption of human behavior: “Rational choice theory: is an economic principle that assumes that individuals always make prudent and logical decisions that provide them with the highest amount of personal utility.” I studied economics and marketing in college [among other things] (I was a business major), even then this assumption was asinine. We teach marketing as psychological manipulation; meaning we teach to advertise to irrational agents because we KNOW for a fact they are not rational. To build models based on rational agents is moronic to the point of offense; and dangerous because it doesn’t predict anything properly. So far, without even scratching the surface of how complicated economics is at the scales we operate at, we have glaring errors in our framework. What could possibly happen, who could imagine things going array!?! < internet sarcasm. It’s time to change; it’s way past time to change; the next market correction is going to put people back on their heels; more over it’s going to knock people back on their asses. It’s time to wake up, pay attention. < repeated mantras

    What follows is a list of jobs that could be culled back 90%+: Anything that has to do with pushing paper: lawyer, accountant, financier, traders, stock brokers, administrators, legislatures, lobbyists, and so on. [You do nothing but create hurdles for others actually doing work; and we don’t need you.] Anything that is a net value loss: most dirty energy jobs (we should seek energy independence), anything in a cubical that requires a commute, anything sales related (stop selling us shit we don’t need nor do we want it [people just don’t know they don’t]), etc. Anything that’ll soon be replaced by technology: Driver of any sort, fast food of any sort, most store clerks and cashiers (see Amazon’s new walk-in and walk-out stores), lecturing (see youtube), etc. ^All this, rough and incomplete, and off the top of my head after only one cup of coffee. Look, we could pay people half their salaries to stay HOME and sort their family out, clean their communities up, and reduce the stress that the 9-5 lifestyle induces. And it would be better (more beneficial) than them showing up at work. We made a mistake during the last crash to bail out the banks (more crooks that ought to be out of jobs) we should have bailed out students and homeowners; it was our money and we gave it to the .001% and the government; have we not learned a god-damned thing? The economy of the future is based on local exchange, sustainable supply chains, and a reduction in excess movement of goods. It’s family centric, energy creating, and value added. It’s quality lifetime products not throw away plastic garbage; it’s centered around children and the future NOT me, me, me, now, now, now! That’s not getting us anywhere take a look around at the twilight zone reality in which you reside.

    Libertarians and an-caps you don’t have the answers; your approaches are as flawed as those in use currently and we don’t have the time, energy, nor the wherewithal for you to give it a whirl. Marxists; you’ve been so wrong and murdering millions for so long I have a hard time understanding why we even let you speak. “Let’s get this labor thing straight. Labor has no value other than under capitalism we can create a consumer out of the laborer which organizes the very fractional contribution of labor into large groups producing many complex parts, and the complex part provides the value. The profit on the price is required to organize others in this network. That’s the whole thing. If you’re ‘labor’ you aren’t ‘value’ to others, since none of us is productive enough to matter. What matters is multipliers, and labor isn’t one. Labor’s primary value lies in (a) you are at least self supporting because (b) as a slave you’re even less productive, and (c) as a barbarian you’re a parasite. The value is in organizing using incentives using prices and profits.” – Curt Doolittle

    Here I should square the circle of time. If your labor isn’t worth anything (and in and of itself, it isn’t) then your time is worth nothing to others; but it is worth EVERYTHING to you and it should be. You have one life [80 years old]; it’s roughly 700,000 hours; you’ll spend a 3rd of those sleeping, leaving you with 467,200 waking hours. If you’re spending a majority of YOUR waking hours working at something you hate, cut that out right now! You ought to value your own time above all else; BUT you can’t force others to value it nor pay you for it. You must create something with your time and offer it as fair value exchange. This is the only way to make your time worth anything to others. Just because you show up and do a job; doesn’t mean you’re adding anything of worth [it’s still very hard to find good employees, ask any employer]. Master something (anything) and make your time worthwhile. I have deep sympathy for people living currently; as I am one of them. I have no problems walking in other’s shoes. We have lied strategically to generations of humans (all the generations), we are at a unique point in time where the lies can be rooted out and have real light shown upon them. Many of them (lies) are painful to let go, but never in history has there been a lie that didn’t come back and take its toll in the future. Reality doesn’t take kindly to being mischaracterized!