May 23, 2020, 2:48 PM —“Great study, but very puzzling that intelligence does not predict income in this study. Too young age at follow-up? Intelligence income relationship is confounded by age (at younger ages, lower intelligence people make more money).— https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wps.20763”—Emil O W Kirkegaard @KirkegaardEmil (Short version: college eduction is no longer a proxy for intelligence). We have a set of problems in making that assessment. (a) between women and underclass preference for pseudoscience, the use of degrees as proxy for intelligence has been eliminated. (b) IQ doesn’t determine wealth: conscientiousness does. (c) IQ determines complexity of work. (d) BUT IQ also determines rate of adaptation, abstractions, error (and FRAUD) detection. So while we can make wealth anywhere on the spectrum there’s an increasing premium on learning, error detection, and abstraction (engineering, tech, law, finance, science, mathematics). (e) the net (uncomfortable truth) is that, confirming tradition, there is a premium on ethics and discipline at the bottom and middle with increasing incentive for ‘cheating’ hidden in complexity at the top (finance, economics, politics), with the middle holding moral high ground. (Which is why I specialize in expansion of the law to reverse the innovations in free riding, cheating, fraud, parasitism, and predation made possible by the expansion of complexity during the 20th century. Particularly using math, econ, and academic pseudosciences. 😉 )
Theme: Productivity
-
Capital is the rabbit strategy in nearly every aspect
Capital is the rabbit strategy in nearly every aspect. https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/capital-is-the-rabbit-strategy-in-nearly-every-aspect/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 18:57:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265718666248642560
-
Capital is the rabbit strategy in nearly every aspect.
Oct 5, 2019, 11:09 AM GENIUS. CHURCHILL ON CAPITAL
—“Capital is the rabbit strategy in nearly every aspect. Machines need quantity over quality — and it is not even close. Quality to create the machine, quantity to move the machine’s product.”– Michael Churchill
(genius)
-
Capital is the rabbit strategy in nearly every aspect.
Oct 5, 2019, 11:09 AM GENIUS. CHURCHILL ON CAPITAL
—“Capital is the rabbit strategy in nearly every aspect. Machines need quantity over quality — and it is not even close. Quality to create the machine, quantity to move the machine’s product.”– Michael Churchill
(genius)
-
More on Guilds
Oct 12, 2019, 8:18 PM Guilds limited access, all but eliminated competition and preserved quality, which prevented optimum market pricing in exchange for optimum benefit to workers – because transport costs for goods were higher than local premium prices. So it’s more of an question of eliminating labor arbitrage. Now, other issues were important in the era because tools cost quite a bit, and it prevented the privatization of these tools. And they were also like guarantees of weights and measures in that Guild members found guilty of cheating on the public would be fined or banned from the guild. One of the policies I want to enforce is right-to-repair which will drive out the cheap goods, drive up prices and durability of goods, ending the disposable, and closing our competitive difference with japan and germany.
-
More on Guilds
Oct 12, 2019, 8:18 PM Guilds limited access, all but eliminated competition and preserved quality, which prevented optimum market pricing in exchange for optimum benefit to workers – because transport costs for goods were higher than local premium prices. So it’s more of an question of eliminating labor arbitrage. Now, other issues were important in the era because tools cost quite a bit, and it prevented the privatization of these tools. And they were also like guarantees of weights and measures in that Guild members found guilty of cheating on the public would be fined or banned from the guild. One of the policies I want to enforce is right-to-repair which will drive out the cheap goods, drive up prices and durability of goods, ending the disposable, and closing our competitive difference with japan and germany.
-
Never Attribute to The Moral What Is Merely Self Interest
Oct 17, 2019, 11:35 AM (slavery) Slavery existed because of labor required for farming. It ended i) because the labor required for farming first reduced by western agrarian innovation, then ii) was eliminated by western innovation, and iii) because western finance, accounting, and taxation technology made customers provide higher returns than slavery. ie: capitalism(markets) produce incentives that slavery cannot match. People are not moral. They are practical. They just make excuses to virtue signal wealth, and the elimination of slavery was an excuse to signal wealth. Never assume people are ‘good’. They are always selfish. In almost every case, from the jewish ban on max of six years, to the pre-modern period, to the modern, to the reason governments banned slavery so that they could tax these individuals, or prevent such accumulation of wealth under slavery that competitors to the state could emerge in colonies. Same for the American civil war. It was so that the western territories did not fall under the political leadership of the south and preserve slavery, which would have left the south in control of the continent, isolating the industrial north.
-
Never Attribute to The Moral What Is Merely Self Interest
Oct 17, 2019, 11:35 AM (slavery) Slavery existed because of labor required for farming. It ended i) because the labor required for farming first reduced by western agrarian innovation, then ii) was eliminated by western innovation, and iii) because western finance, accounting, and taxation technology made customers provide higher returns than slavery. ie: capitalism(markets) produce incentives that slavery cannot match. People are not moral. They are practical. They just make excuses to virtue signal wealth, and the elimination of slavery was an excuse to signal wealth. Never assume people are ‘good’. They are always selfish. In almost every case, from the jewish ban on max of six years, to the pre-modern period, to the modern, to the reason governments banned slavery so that they could tax these individuals, or prevent such accumulation of wealth under slavery that competitors to the state could emerge in colonies. Same for the American civil war. It was so that the western territories did not fall under the political leadership of the south and preserve slavery, which would have left the south in control of the continent, isolating the industrial north.
-
Writing Nonfiction Books
Oct 17, 2019, 3:55 PM It’s very unlikely you can write a book. It’s likely you can write a paper. Its likely if you can write a series of papers that you can combine them into a book. Most of the time a paper is sufficient for a book. A book merely provides a set of historical examples, or hypothetical examples, that illustrate the sequence of dependencies on the one and and applications on the other. So, learn to write arguments (2pp). Then combine arguments into a paper (20pp), then papers into a book (200pp+). Most authors write books to document their learning experience. This is different from pretense that you have a problem figured out until you have finished your learning experience, accumulated sets of arguments, sets of papers (arguments in context) and can combine them into a book (narrations of examples past and potential that illustrate each argument and paper). There is a reason all libertarian books are introductory. There is a reason all feminist and anti-western authors write in postmodern prose. There is a reason philosophy is written in rationalism rather than the law of reciprocity. So that they can lie. Conversely, there is a reason hard science is written in operational language – so they cannot lie. cheers
-
Writing Nonfiction Books
Oct 17, 2019, 3:55 PM It’s very unlikely you can write a book. It’s likely you can write a paper. Its likely if you can write a series of papers that you can combine them into a book. Most of the time a paper is sufficient for a book. A book merely provides a set of historical examples, or hypothetical examples, that illustrate the sequence of dependencies on the one and and applications on the other. So, learn to write arguments (2pp). Then combine arguments into a paper (20pp), then papers into a book (200pp+). Most authors write books to document their learning experience. This is different from pretense that you have a problem figured out until you have finished your learning experience, accumulated sets of arguments, sets of papers (arguments in context) and can combine them into a book (narrations of examples past and potential that illustrate each argument and paper). There is a reason all libertarian books are introductory. There is a reason all feminist and anti-western authors write in postmodern prose. There is a reason philosophy is written in rationalism rather than the law of reciprocity. So that they can lie. Conversely, there is a reason hard science is written in operational language – so they cannot lie. cheers