Curt Doolittle

Theme: Predation

  • INSURED, FREE RIDER VS PARASITE – The Spectrum Of Free Riding. Terminology confl

    INSURED, FREE RIDER VS PARASITE – The Spectrum Of Free Riding.

    Terminology conflict: “Free Rider” vs “Parasitic”

    In dry economic language, we use the term ‘free rider’. In libertarian language, we use the term “Parasitic”.

    Free Riding refers to the in-group relation between producer and free rider – in group, in-family, free riding is a form of redistribution.

    In the North Sea Model, Parasitic is accurate since the unit of cooperation is the absolute nuclear family. And free riding even upon parents is prohibited. So parasitic is the correct out-group description of the affect free riders have on the producers.

    I had always considered ‘parasitic’ a loaded term. But it’s not. Turns out that it’s accurate.

    Although propertarianism has led me to conclude that I do not see a problem with insuring people against destitution, I so see a problem with parasitism and free riding.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-26 07:40:00 UTC

  • My experience over the past month has convinced me even more, that the state is

    My experience over the past month has convinced me even more, that the state is an out-of-control predator. And that one’s only defense is portable property – a mixture of cash and gold. And that any real property one possesses, is just on lease from the state until they can find someone who will pay more for it than you do.

    We have been fattened and herded for ready slaughter.

    The road to hell is paved with cheap, unearned, status signals.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-23 07:08:00 UTC

  • GET AWAY WITH WHATEVER WE CAN WHILE WE CAN. The progressive economic and politic

    GET AWAY WITH WHATEVER WE CAN WHILE WE CAN.

    The progressive economic and political strategy.

    (eh… we’ll fix it later.)

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-10 04:27:00 UTC

  • If we cannot cooperate, then we can either surrender, or conquer. It is cheapest

    If we cannot cooperate, then we can either surrender, or conquer. It is cheapest to surrender. But it is a theft from all those who did not surrender before you. And when they saved in the past, for you to consume in the present, they did so at much higher cost to themselves. So the only solution is to conquer. Out of self defense.

    Violence is the only solution.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-06 10:38:00 UTC

  • WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MUTUAL INSURANCE, FREE-RIDING AND PARASITISM? And

    WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MUTUAL INSURANCE, FREE-RIDING AND PARASITISM?

    And how does one know those points of demarcation?

    The central problem of human cooperation is not violence, it is free-riding. Violence and theft in-group, turns out to be fairly easy to suppress. But free-riding in-group is very hard to suppress.

    So, to use a common libertarian philosophical error, lets look at Crusoe’s island. Why? Because the central problem of cooperation for any human being is that he is born into a tribe that raises him, whether that tribe is a pair or few dozen parents. So the model we must work from instead, is an island evenly distributed with individuals of different ages and abilities, all of whom naturally try to free-ride on one another. Free riding is a useful strategy for a multi-generational animal that requires high investment parenting.

    1) Rearing and Care-taking

    2) Mutual Insurance

    3) Free-Riding

    4) Parasitism

    5) Fraud by omission

    6) Fraud by misrepresentation

    7) Entrapment

    8) Theft

    9) Violence

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-06 08:34:00 UTC

  • I THINK MY EXPLANATION FOR THE ORIGIN OF THE STATE IS MORE ACCURATE: THe state c

    I THINK MY EXPLANATION FOR THE ORIGIN OF THE STATE IS MORE ACCURATE:

    THe state centralizes free riding, and transforms it into rent seeking. This forces the multitudes to resort to the market alone.

    If this is true, and I am fairly sure it is, then the state is less relevant than is the expurgation of free riding. (And that makes a lot more sense than any argument to efficiency.)

    This may be one of the better ideas I’ve had.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-12-01 13:30:00 UTC

  • BUT IS IT GENETIC?

      Yes, conservatives are INNATELY more critical of free-riders: “North Eurasian and Circumpolar hunter-gatherers (Hutterites and Amish, Puritans) will be more prone to altruistic punishment than those from Middle Old World culture area (Jews, Gypsies, Chinese)” “…. *** Puritan groups seem particularly prone to bouts of moralistic outrage directed at those of their own people seen as free riders and morally blameworthy.***” -Kevin MacDonald AND SO: Whether it is cultural or genetic or both doesn’t matter so much, although I’m in the 60/40 camp in favor of genetic on this topic. And the pareto rule would suggest that as long as you’re in a 90/10 proposition or less, diversity isn’t a problem. But two things are certain: a) people don’t actually assimilate outside of their gene pool, and b) our tribal differences – our tribal DIVERSITY is something very precious for everyone. Probably the ‘cuircumpolar’ in particular. Because that individualism is economically superior to group-ishness.

  • BUT IS IT GENETIC?

      Yes, conservatives are INNATELY more critical of free-riders: “North Eurasian and Circumpolar hunter-gatherers (Hutterites and Amish, Puritans) will be more prone to altruistic punishment than those from Middle Old World culture area (Jews, Gypsies, Chinese)” “…. *** Puritan groups seem particularly prone to bouts of moralistic outrage directed at those of their own people seen as free riders and morally blameworthy.***” -Kevin MacDonald AND SO: Whether it is cultural or genetic or both doesn’t matter so much, although I’m in the 60/40 camp in favor of genetic on this topic. And the pareto rule would suggest that as long as you’re in a 90/10 proposition or less, diversity isn’t a problem. But two things are certain: a) people don’t actually assimilate outside of their gene pool, and b) our tribal differences – our tribal DIVERSITY is something very precious for everyone. Probably the ‘cuircumpolar’ in particular. Because that individualism is economically superior to group-ishness.

  • STATE IS AN INSTITUTION OF THEFT

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBVFpYN0iNoTHE STATE IS AN INSTITUTION OF THEFT

    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-24 08:32:00 UTC

  • BUT IS IT GENETIC? Yes, conservatives are INNATELY more critical of free-riders:

    BUT IS IT GENETIC?

    Yes, conservatives are INNATELY more critical of free-riders:

    “North Eurasian and Circumpolar hunter-gatherers (Hutterites and Amish, Puritans) will be more prone to altruistic punishment than those from Middle Old World culture area (Jews, Gypsies, Chinese)”

    “…. *** Puritan groups seem particularly prone to bouts of moralistic outrage directed at those of their own people seen as free riders and morally blameworthy.***” -Kevin MacDonald

    AND SO:

    Whether it is cultural or genetic or both doesn’t matter so much, although I’m in the 60/40 camp in favor of genetic on this topic. And the pareto rule would suggest that as long as you’re in a 90/10 proposition or less, diversity isn’t a problem.

    But two things are certain: a) people don’t actually assimilate outside of their gene pool, and b) our tribal differences – our tribal DIVERSITY is something very precious for everyone. Probably the ‘cuircumpolar’ in particular. Because that individualism is economically superior to group-ishness.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-11-05 04:12:00 UTC