The economics of consumption has replaced morality in politics, but it is possible to restore consumption-with-tests-of-changes-in-the-state-of-capital possible under commodity money, localized capital, regional markets, and social homogeneity and abandon simple volume of consumption under conditions of paper money, social heterogeneity, world capital, and worldwide markets, thereby ending hyperconsumption, including of genetic, social, institutional, cultural and civilizational capital. In other words we lost the ability to test the changes in civilizational capital, by failing to measure them as trade moved from regional to national to civilizational to world scope – and in doing so our failure to include measurements of, and tools for measuring, human, cultural, institutional, genetic, etc capital was exposed and exploited, just as was our local tolerance for information stated with european law norm, christian values, and aristotelian reason. I keep saying this but the problem of the 20th was a failure of our institutions to produce systems of measurement and incentives to defend capital in parallel with the commercial and monetary expansion. The beauty of the western common law under which the first court finding that resolves a dispute over an innovation in means of irreciprocity, is that it responds the fastest to inventions of irreciprocity forcing us to continually innovate in means of competition under reciprocity. The problem is that our law failed to modernize particularly in two areas (1) measurement of the very capital that provides our civilizational means of competition (human , informal institutional and formal institutional capital), and (2) expanding our law to cover innovations in deception for the purpose of irreciprocity and obscuring that very capital consumption, made possible by the industrialization of false speech, and the reformation of abrahamic supernaturalism, sophism and denial, into abrahamic pseudoscience sophism and denial: marxism, boazianism, freudianism, feminism, postmodernism, and political correctness: denialism. We aren’t unique. It destroyed every empire i know of. Because what is accumulated rent seeking other than a failure to measure all capital transformation, and to create new incentives under the law to suppress newly available forms of parasitism that consume rather than produce human capital. All civilizations collapse because they have exhausted the capital available to use in the reorganization of a pareto distribution of influences, and a nash equilibrium of rewards for preserving that new system of organization, in response to scarcities, shocks, changes in trade routes, conflcit, war (Physical, Ideological, religious, economic), and variations in the environment (drought, climate, water and river changes, continuous quakes, world volcanic activity – which aside from very large asteroids is the most dangerous of all.
Theme: Productivity
-
—“Can I Write a 1000 Page Novel Today?”—
Oct 25, 2019, 9:16 PM
- It’s economically unwise at present to write a 900 page novel. It is much better to break it into three books, and edit to provide rewards for the reader at the end of each.
It is extremely difficult to accumulate sufficient life experience to provide character, plot, and environmental novelty (entertainment) for 900 pages. That’s why people don’t do it – they can’t.
The current trend is simply ‘more’ characters, plots, etc in an effort to move beyond the exhausted 90-min plot lines, that books were written for, in the hope that they would be optioned as scripts.
To answer the question, I would need to understand the plot, theory, or experiment you’re trying in the book, the number of characters, and maybe a few of their story arcs.
Authors you might know: RRMartin (Can I reverse the good vs evil exhausted plot line through continuous character development using epic character arcs over a long period of time, written for teens, and young adult heroes with adult subject matter,). Rowling ( can I reach a young adult or teen audience, with a stereotypical boy’s adventure, written from a girl’s perspective and voice, played by a boy to to maximize my book sales, using one year of schooling at a time, where the character grows with the audience and books are released in parallel to the audience’s growth.) Stephenson (Cryptonomicon: can I write the seminal work of the Cyberpunk era, combining Ludlum’s thriller, King’s Characters, Tom Clancy’s scale, tech entrepreneur life in the dot com boom, And in doing so explain the the history of cryptography across generations, construction of the world banking and economic system, and how it could change in the future, shifting the world power balance. Maybe gibson was more influential, but Stephenson wrote the canon literature of that era.) Eddings (can I merge with wizard of earthsea, pohl’s ‘scientific magic’, and tolkien’s epic wars between civilizations, and do the characters well enough to get a away with it and not be called a hack? Add a hundred other copycats using the formula after him here….) King (It, the Stand – most of his books – Can I weave an entire village , an enormous cast of characters, into an epic of mythic consequence mystery and scale, and succeed with most of the characters by producing an backstory, dialog, and character arc the audience will empathize with despite so many of them you need a score card to keep track. I mean, the stand is a dark sci fi attempt at Tolkein’s epic. We should note that while King does manage to produce some archetypal characters in a novel context he failed in the stand to achieve his goal of maintaining character empathy, and audience interests, for the duration.) Rand (Atlas Shrugged can I write a play that the reader will empathize with, that creates a middle class heroic mythos of creative excellence, where the characters represent political archetypes, instead of writing another work of philosophy that will be ignored? (it worked despite cutout characters. Not as clear as plato’s socrates, but she did it.) ) Tolkien (Can I create the largest most detailed alternate world ever tried by the reconstruction of the tradition of anglo saxon, germanic, proto-germanic european, mythos as a means of exploring ancient tongues. Can I write an anglo saxon world we would be desperate to live in, because we sense it is more moral than the world we live in today? Don’t over analyze Tolkien. ). Michner: (can I learn about and teach history of different areas of the world by weaving long intergenerational family stories over many generations with interesting plots with strong characters instead of writing a history book or set of biographies – and will that sell to readers? Absolutely.) Gone With The Wind … (The experience of the entirety of the civil war in the south?) War And Peace (the experience of the entirety of the napoleonic invasion of russia and leave a lasting memory of it as a monument? Yes.) Don Quixote (Can I write a homeric epic of equal meaning, and greater tragedy because modernity traded knowledge and prosperity yes, but destroyed chivalry, honor, nobility – and his idealism is considered insane and useless in the face of modernity. You get the point. What are you going to deliver in 900 pages of novel that is novel, and novel enough to hold the reader’s attention when his or her attention is competing with every other demand for his or her attention? What do you have to offer? I wish I could get people to write write an overview of their plot (a theory of the book), then some back story. then some character backstories. Then write a few SCENES. So then you can immerse yourself in a world and weave your way through it because you have enough to work with that you won’t just imagine the most recent stereotypical thing you encountered. Try to write the skeleton of the story while inspired, in just one to t three weeks. Even if you just throw it away. Then pick scenes that you feel inspired to work with. You will find that you will create anchors, and then ask “why would my characters get from A to B”. Research. Fill your head with whatever your character’s head would be filled with in the circumstance. then your writing won’t be trite. If you sit down and try to daydream a novel you will create precisely nothing novel.
-
—“Can I Write a 1000 Page Novel Today?”—
Oct 25, 2019, 9:16 PM
- It’s economically unwise at present to write a 900 page novel. It is much better to break it into three books, and edit to provide rewards for the reader at the end of each.
It is extremely difficult to accumulate sufficient life experience to provide character, plot, and environmental novelty (entertainment) for 900 pages. That’s why people don’t do it – they can’t.
The current trend is simply ‘more’ characters, plots, etc in an effort to move beyond the exhausted 90-min plot lines, that books were written for, in the hope that they would be optioned as scripts.
To answer the question, I would need to understand the plot, theory, or experiment you’re trying in the book, the number of characters, and maybe a few of their story arcs.
Authors you might know: RRMartin (Can I reverse the good vs evil exhausted plot line through continuous character development using epic character arcs over a long period of time, written for teens, and young adult heroes with adult subject matter,). Rowling ( can I reach a young adult or teen audience, with a stereotypical boy’s adventure, written from a girl’s perspective and voice, played by a boy to to maximize my book sales, using one year of schooling at a time, where the character grows with the audience and books are released in parallel to the audience’s growth.) Stephenson (Cryptonomicon: can I write the seminal work of the Cyberpunk era, combining Ludlum’s thriller, King’s Characters, Tom Clancy’s scale, tech entrepreneur life in the dot com boom, And in doing so explain the the history of cryptography across generations, construction of the world banking and economic system, and how it could change in the future, shifting the world power balance. Maybe gibson was more influential, but Stephenson wrote the canon literature of that era.) Eddings (can I merge with wizard of earthsea, pohl’s ‘scientific magic’, and tolkien’s epic wars between civilizations, and do the characters well enough to get a away with it and not be called a hack? Add a hundred other copycats using the formula after him here….) King (It, the Stand – most of his books – Can I weave an entire village , an enormous cast of characters, into an epic of mythic consequence mystery and scale, and succeed with most of the characters by producing an backstory, dialog, and character arc the audience will empathize with despite so many of them you need a score card to keep track. I mean, the stand is a dark sci fi attempt at Tolkein’s epic. We should note that while King does manage to produce some archetypal characters in a novel context he failed in the stand to achieve his goal of maintaining character empathy, and audience interests, for the duration.) Rand (Atlas Shrugged can I write a play that the reader will empathize with, that creates a middle class heroic mythos of creative excellence, where the characters represent political archetypes, instead of writing another work of philosophy that will be ignored? (it worked despite cutout characters. Not as clear as plato’s socrates, but she did it.) ) Tolkien (Can I create the largest most detailed alternate world ever tried by the reconstruction of the tradition of anglo saxon, germanic, proto-germanic european, mythos as a means of exploring ancient tongues. Can I write an anglo saxon world we would be desperate to live in, because we sense it is more moral than the world we live in today? Don’t over analyze Tolkien. ). Michner: (can I learn about and teach history of different areas of the world by weaving long intergenerational family stories over many generations with interesting plots with strong characters instead of writing a history book or set of biographies – and will that sell to readers? Absolutely.) Gone With The Wind … (The experience of the entirety of the civil war in the south?) War And Peace (the experience of the entirety of the napoleonic invasion of russia and leave a lasting memory of it as a monument? Yes.) Don Quixote (Can I write a homeric epic of equal meaning, and greater tragedy because modernity traded knowledge and prosperity yes, but destroyed chivalry, honor, nobility – and his idealism is considered insane and useless in the face of modernity. You get the point. What are you going to deliver in 900 pages of novel that is novel, and novel enough to hold the reader’s attention when his or her attention is competing with every other demand for his or her attention? What do you have to offer? I wish I could get people to write write an overview of their plot (a theory of the book), then some back story. then some character backstories. Then write a few SCENES. So then you can immerse yourself in a world and weave your way through it because you have enough to work with that you won’t just imagine the most recent stereotypical thing you encountered. Try to write the skeleton of the story while inspired, in just one to t three weeks. Even if you just throw it away. Then pick scenes that you feel inspired to work with. You will find that you will create anchors, and then ask “why would my characters get from A to B”. Research. Fill your head with whatever your character’s head would be filled with in the circumstance. then your writing won’t be trite. If you sit down and try to daydream a novel you will create precisely nothing novel.
-
You Can’t Unsee It
Their rapid verbal facility with gossip, pilpul, and critique, is not matched by intellectual achievement in arts, writing, innovation, or productivity. And, upon investigation, in all but the hardest of sciences, it still consists of false promise, baiting into hazard, rewards from undermining achieved, pilpul and critique.
-
You Can’t Unsee It
Their rapid verbal facility with gossip, pilpul, and critique, is not matched by intellectual achievement in arts, writing, innovation, or productivity. And, upon investigation, in all but the hardest of sciences, it still consists of false promise, baiting into hazard, rewards from undermining achieved, pilpul and critique.
-
Usury
USURY (repost) Interest vs Usury. Interest is necessary for the organization of complex production. it is beneficial for production of generations. It is risky for the purpose of consumption. It is harmful for the production of entertainment. It is very harmful for the production of anti-social behaviors. What demarcates Interest from Usury? (a) credit for consumption rather than production. (b) borrower beware rather than lender beware. (c) collateral If lending is limited to production, lender risk, and un-recoverability for anything other than fraud, then it’s shared risk. And it increases use of stock markets where access to liquidity is possible instead of collateral recovery. The enemy’s technique consists of false promise, baiting in to moral hazard, pilpul, critique, and profiting from capture of hazards, and capitalizing those captures as systems of rents. Usury is the most common example of baiting into hazard, by the extension of credit for the purpose of consumption, the use of collateral, and the use of the court to transfer assets to the lender. The enemy’s technique uses every possible means of baiting into hazard, defending this bait by pilpul and critique, profiting from the hazard – both private and public – then taking the accumulated capital and seeking rents against the population until they revolt and prosecute their revenge. … There is a reason this technique works with high trust europeans but not elsewhere. There is a reason it works with women and underclasses but not established men. Because our democracy makes us vulnerable to false promise, and the underclasses are easily baited by false promise, we are tolerant of meritocracy until too late. Worse, it is easiest to exploit our social order of MARKETS and LAGGING legal codes in defense of those markets and our people. And lagging technology for replacing each of the means of parasitism: financial, commercial, educational, informational, political, social, normative, and traditional
-
Usury
USURY (repost) Interest vs Usury. Interest is necessary for the organization of complex production. it is beneficial for production of generations. It is risky for the purpose of consumption. It is harmful for the production of entertainment. It is very harmful for the production of anti-social behaviors. What demarcates Interest from Usury? (a) credit for consumption rather than production. (b) borrower beware rather than lender beware. (c) collateral If lending is limited to production, lender risk, and un-recoverability for anything other than fraud, then it’s shared risk. And it increases use of stock markets where access to liquidity is possible instead of collateral recovery. The enemy’s technique consists of false promise, baiting in to moral hazard, pilpul, critique, and profiting from capture of hazards, and capitalizing those captures as systems of rents. Usury is the most common example of baiting into hazard, by the extension of credit for the purpose of consumption, the use of collateral, and the use of the court to transfer assets to the lender. The enemy’s technique uses every possible means of baiting into hazard, defending this bait by pilpul and critique, profiting from the hazard – both private and public – then taking the accumulated capital and seeking rents against the population until they revolt and prosecute their revenge. … There is a reason this technique works with high trust europeans but not elsewhere. There is a reason it works with women and underclasses but not established men. Because our democracy makes us vulnerable to false promise, and the underclasses are easily baited by false promise, we are tolerant of meritocracy until too late. Worse, it is easiest to exploit our social order of MARKETS and LAGGING legal codes in defense of those markets and our people. And lagging technology for replacing each of the means of parasitism: financial, commercial, educational, informational, political, social, normative, and traditional
-
Economic Influences on Today”s Art World
Oct 30, 2019, 12:30 PM 1) spaces are now general purpose rather than designed for function. This makes them less amenable to artistic treatment because they have to be ‘resold’. 2) Postwar materials (steel, glass, and panel products) are not amenable to organic arts, and it’s organic arts that constitute the majority of the western thematic tradition – particularly the human form. 3) Architectural software is .. great for engineering and tradesmen but tends to produce ‘sh-tty’ attempts at imitating Lloyd Wright – to mid century, as if the Craftsman never happened. But at least soviet concrete brutalism is done. Fk. Great for government buildings. Sh-t for the artwork they decorated it with. 4) Hollywood is a black hole for the arts, because it’s possible to make money at it on and off, while keeping ‘other jobs’ going. 5) Camera first, large printers second and Digital third has eliminated much of the handicraft that went into the production of durable arts. 6) Decoration will fit anywhere but “Art” (meaning, craftsmanship, materials) has been successfully undermined by the marxist-pomo-feminist tradition, and intentional deprivation of citizens from education in the heroic tradition – replaced with the victim tradition has made high art impossible or unmarketable. 7) The economics of producing inventory vs the percent of sales is such that, say, if you want to produce 200k of income for a gallery and 60K of income for yourself, you have to do the math on how much time and materials you can put into each work. So at an average of 10k per piece, that means 20ps must sell, that means no less than five galleries, that means 40 pcs in inventory at all times. And that’s only so many days or weeks per piece. Most people produce a production line, and use it to finance their artwork. (I know art jewelry, print and panting the best.) Scale up to sculpture then to play, then to film, and down to print and farther down to photo and farther down to posters and kitch but the general math is the same -just like every other biz. There is a reason single digits of artists make a living, and instead work to fund their art hobby that generates lunch money.
-
Economic Influences on Today”s Art World
Oct 30, 2019, 12:30 PM 1) spaces are now general purpose rather than designed for function. This makes them less amenable to artistic treatment because they have to be ‘resold’. 2) Postwar materials (steel, glass, and panel products) are not amenable to organic arts, and it’s organic arts that constitute the majority of the western thematic tradition – particularly the human form. 3) Architectural software is .. great for engineering and tradesmen but tends to produce ‘sh-tty’ attempts at imitating Lloyd Wright – to mid century, as if the Craftsman never happened. But at least soviet concrete brutalism is done. Fk. Great for government buildings. Sh-t for the artwork they decorated it with. 4) Hollywood is a black hole for the arts, because it’s possible to make money at it on and off, while keeping ‘other jobs’ going. 5) Camera first, large printers second and Digital third has eliminated much of the handicraft that went into the production of durable arts. 6) Decoration will fit anywhere but “Art” (meaning, craftsmanship, materials) has been successfully undermined by the marxist-pomo-feminist tradition, and intentional deprivation of citizens from education in the heroic tradition – replaced with the victim tradition has made high art impossible or unmarketable. 7) The economics of producing inventory vs the percent of sales is such that, say, if you want to produce 200k of income for a gallery and 60K of income for yourself, you have to do the math on how much time and materials you can put into each work. So at an average of 10k per piece, that means 20ps must sell, that means no less than five galleries, that means 40 pcs in inventory at all times. And that’s only so many days or weeks per piece. Most people produce a production line, and use it to finance their artwork. (I know art jewelry, print and panting the best.) Scale up to sculpture then to play, then to film, and down to print and farther down to photo and farther down to posters and kitch but the general math is the same -just like every other biz. There is a reason single digits of artists make a living, and instead work to fund their art hobby that generates lunch money.
-
The Post Marx-Keynes Economy: Our Restoration
Oct 31, 2019, 11:33 AM
—“There’s plenty wrong with GDP as a global measure of system performance. One of those problems is that no one has yet to come up with a better one.”—Duke Newcomb
Income != balance sheet. That’s the problem. (Really). GDP P/C @ PPP = Standard of living. Change in Balance Sheet = Gain or Loss (productivity); GDP = Debt Capacity = Military Capacity = Coercive Capacity and that’s all it means. The problem is false productivity, were in consumption of capital is obscured by velocity, in order to maintain keynesian employment as a (bad) means of restoring economic velocity (which is the error) – where under digital and fiat money, liquidity distribution directly to the people will make employment a measure only of demographic utility (which is what the left is afraid of) and the correction of which (as I recommend) will re-suppress immigration, and re-suppress underclass reproduction, and restore middle class reproduction.The only way to increase wealth in this model is reproduction of the middle class, employment of young and old, payment for labor necessary to create an aesthetic commons, one child policy for those who are dependent, and following the japanese in automation.