Curt Doolittle

Theme: Productivity

  • No. Then in my mind, we use force to perform restitution, punish(harm), ostraciz

    No. Then in my mind, we use force to perform restitution, punish(harm), ostracize(remove), or kill those who do not limit their actions to productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer, free of imposition of costs either directly or by externality against that which others have obtained an interest by the same means. People will not happily cooperate, they will cooperate because it is profitable for those who enforce such cooperation to enforce it, and profitable for people who are the victims of involuntarily imposed costs, and unprofitable for those who even attempt to impose costs. In other words: rule of law, under natural law, the scope of property being demonstrated by acts reciprocity.

    Now, go ahead and try to refute that, and I’ll eat you for lunch like pringles with beer.

    I don’t do pseudoscience, or pseudorationalism, or idealism, or supernaturalism. I do science.

    Now try it. Go a head. Lets see if you can hold your own without lying, prevaricating, or straw manning. ;)

    btw: I never said the state is a market. I said the state is an error of corporatism. But that commons are necessary for the competitive existence and persistency of a polity capable of producing liberty. So, how can one produce commons while preserving rule of law, while preventing the rise of discretionary rule (a state)? I can answer that question. You cannot. You cannot because you allowed the problem to be framed as impossible – and developing excuses to pretend it wasn’t necessary, rather than solving the problem, or simply admitting you could not – as rothbard could not – solve the problem.

    Read more

    Reply

    I don’t use a state. I use nothing but private property and rule of law, under natural law.

    How will you create the commons of property rights if commons are ‘invalid’?

    Well, someone would have to sue the mises institute for fraud, damages, etc. Which I assume would occur. But there is no ‘state’ to take action in the absence of private suit against those who distribute falsehoods.

    Reply

    Funny. I though my ”whole thing’ was to eliminate jewish marxism, jewish libertinism, jewish neo-conservativsm, anglo french and german pseudorationalism and pseudoscience, and restore empirical (truthful) government and a market between the classes using multiple houses of representatives chosen by lot.

    But then with a name like (((Rose))) I suppose you are just another liar doing what liars do – whether lying by intent, whether culturally indoctrinated into lying, or whether genetic predisposition to lying. 😉 (bait)

    Here is how to translate Rose: “I want a way to steal. I want to steal private production (jewish socialism), I want to steal commons production (jewish l ibertarianism) or I want to steal political production (jewish neoconservatism).

    Conservatives just want to stop you from stealing. Anglo Libertarianism just want to stop you from stealing even a little – even including stealing by their own.

    –“We”–

    We are the people who fight, kill, ostracize, punish, perform restitution upon parasites upon the polity, upon the commons, or upon the private production of people like ‘us’. And if you wish to engage in political, institutional, normative, informational, commercial, or interpersonal parasitism, we will force restitution, punishment, ostracization, murder, or war upon you. IN which case we will happily exterminate people like you who continue to advocate methods of parasitism. ;)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-16 14:09:00 UTC

  • ARE WE A SINKING SHIP??? 1) Take this same list. 2) Take the median gdp figure a

    ARE WE A SINKING SHIP???

    1) Take this same list.

    2) Take the median gdp figure and median income of each.

    3) Calculate the target median income and gdp necessary to reach second world middle class incomes.

    4) Now, overlay that on top of this chart.

    what wil you see? those places that think theya re getting better are so because they have so far to go, while those places that are already there, cannot go farther without extraordinary investment.

    or stated another way, the others are catching up by consuming our institutional, cultural, and technological advances.

    We are, on the other hand, in exchange for cheap goods, allowing our incomes to be exported (trade deficits) overseas instead of investing them in maintaining the advantage that we have held for 500 years.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-16 13:56:00 UTC

  • RUNNING WITH THE ISLAND 120 …. If the Island 120 hypothesis is true, then to h

    RUNNING WITH THE ISLAND 120 ….

    If the Island 120 hypothesis is true, then to hit a Pareto Optimum for post-industrial civilization, 70% of population in production, 20% of the population in assets, 1% of the population in ideas, means that we would need to shift the distribution closer to 115 (closer to the early modern period’s, late medieval period’s, distributions). And that this process (winnowing) NEVER ENDS.

    What does that mean? That means that the developed countries have a 50%-60% population surplus. And the developing or underdeveloped countries have closer to 80% – 90% population surpluses.

    What does that mean? It means the total world population target is closer to the 1-2B ‘rule of thumb’ that looks more like the carrying capacity of the planet. Or the 500M-1B that looks like the optimum carrying capacity of the planet.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-15 11:49:00 UTC

  • “At what point to diseconomies of organizational scale kick in or is this a flaw

    —“At what point to diseconomies of organizational scale kick in or is this a flawed frame?”—Lee Tucker

    Curt Doolittle

    That is the entire question as far as I am concerned.

    If we take an empirical look, the scale increases with available information systems, and the homogeneity of the population.

    But in simple terms, a city = a market, and a market must serve a demographic and a demographic must exploit a niche in the regional or world market.

    So as far as I can tell there is some ratio between population, density, iq, and homogeneity, institutiona means of distributing/collecting information necessary for decidablity, and relative productivity (purchasing power) that should tell us the optimum size.

    the value of scale kicked in with gunpowder and the high cost of total war. (napoleon). HOwever, with nuclear weapons, that value disappears, so as far as I can tell, 5-10M, and that is up from what looks like 2-3M in the last century, simply because of the complexity of goods and services produced, and longer lifetimes (in other words more people does not translate to more people productiely employe) . So population can increase without affecting the systems of production.

    Conversely, lets look at competition: a bigger city with more assets can endure shocks over longer periods of economic reorganization, by spending down those assets.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-14 15:04:00 UTC

  • ( Not that I disagree, that we shouldn’t get involved with boots on the ground,

    ( Not that I disagree, that we shouldn’t get involved with boots on the ground, but the choice here isn’t binary)

    AMERICAN ECONOMY (a High Spatial Consumption Society)

    1 – economy funded by financing of homes.

    2 – cheap oil necessary for commerce and trade in large territory requiring cars trucks, heat, electricity over large areas.

    3 – cheap oil possible by preserving a meritocratic market for oil.

    4 – a meritocratic market for oil preserved by an extensive military empire.

    5 – a vast military empire paid for by use of the dollar as a reserve currency.

    EUROPE

    Europe not only does not pay for her own strategic defense, but by issuing the Euro, buying oil in euros, and circumventing the need for dollars to pay for oil, europeans free-ride non only on the personal and social costs of defense, but on the discounted prices for oil that they experience at no cost to themselves.

    GEOSTRATEGY

    Russian Sphere;

    Russia (140), Belarus(10), Kazhakstan(17)

    The choice is between

    1 – Iran(77)+Syria(23)+Iraq(33)+Russia(140), 265M?

    2 – ISIS+Al Queda+Iran = ~100?,

    3 – Turkey(75)+ whomever survives the above

    and on the opposite side:

    4 – The Gulf States + Saudis + Israel+Egypt+the rest of north africa.

    OBJECTIVE

    What looks increasingly possible is Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, allied with Pakistan. With Iran as the core state like ‘Germany’ planned for europe, russia for the slavic lands.

    if that occurs the orbit will include Azerbaijan(9.5) and Turkmenistan(5.2), and while russia will fight for the oil fields, she will not be able to defend herself, and will lose Kazakhstan from Russia’s influence.

    At which point we will lose Russia.

    And iran will control the world’s oil supply, issue its own currency, demand it as the world’s oil currency, and then the word’s reserve currency, making the islamic civilizations exploit the developed civilizations.

    China(1.4b) takes north asia (siberia) back.

    Leaving the west and china and islam as the only surviving civilizations.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-11 18:57:00 UTC

  • Pursuit of Happiness In Social Orders

    HAPPINESS IN SOCIAL ORDERS Humans in general, are generally happy if they are working to produce gains, not to forestall losses. It does not take a great deal of income to do that. Most of what we spend is on status signaling to ourselves and others. Food, clothing, shelter, heat, water, electricity, appliances, air conditioning, children, family, friends. But we need be insulated from ‘the evil people’ who are unsatisfied with such – so we pay heavily to keep away from them. We pay even more heavily to be with people who are better than us, that we can learn from, and gain from the opportunities of proximity. If you truncate your lower classes, occupy your mischievous young males with physical labor in support of the commons, occupy your young women with children, and invest heavily in commons, most of us will be able to live very well, and the few that make our living-well possible will live far above us in signals – as they should. We have economics all wrong. We need multiple economies both martial(slave), public works (underclass), syndicalism(labor), and capitalism( middle, upper middle, and upper) And we do not need this hamster wheel of continuous consumption. We need only eradicate immigration except for the very best of the upper classes, eradicate through constraint on reproduction the lower classes, and eradicate the ability for non-kin to compete with us for control over the production of commons, and the status signals that are the reward for assisting in the production of those commons. Unfortunately we have not learned to constrain the impulses of women to satisfy the need to give (free endorphins for redistributing the production of others), and we have not learned to constrain the impulses of all (as did the communists) to satisfy the need to feel ‘above’ someone, or that they are not the low rung on the ladder, (free endorphins for false status signals), or the need to demonstrate status through conspicuous consumption (endorphins for possessing that which others do not), or the need to virtue signal (free endorphins for empty talk or gossip). Other societies, including ours, in much of our history, have suppressed unearned signals as a form of theft. It seems like this more than anything, combined with democracy that let it loose, has been the reason we are not happy. The hamster wheel of consumption is merely selling us the curse of Sisyphus by the promise of a utopia, the same way a drug dealer sells drugs, a fast food chain sells sugars and fats, a dietary supplement manufacturer sells ‘vitamins’ an advertiser sells status, a politician sells socialism or communism, or priest and his prophet sells life after death or some number of virgins. They’re all lies. Happiness is simple. Working to produce gains, not to forestall losses. And we can only forestall losses if we have the inventory that is sufficient to live off our gains.

  • Pursuit of Happiness In Social Orders

    HAPPINESS IN SOCIAL ORDERS Humans in general, are generally happy if they are working to produce gains, not to forestall losses. It does not take a great deal of income to do that. Most of what we spend is on status signaling to ourselves and others. Food, clothing, shelter, heat, water, electricity, appliances, air conditioning, children, family, friends. But we need be insulated from ‘the evil people’ who are unsatisfied with such – so we pay heavily to keep away from them. We pay even more heavily to be with people who are better than us, that we can learn from, and gain from the opportunities of proximity. If you truncate your lower classes, occupy your mischievous young males with physical labor in support of the commons, occupy your young women with children, and invest heavily in commons, most of us will be able to live very well, and the few that make our living-well possible will live far above us in signals – as they should. We have economics all wrong. We need multiple economies both martial(slave), public works (underclass), syndicalism(labor), and capitalism( middle, upper middle, and upper) And we do not need this hamster wheel of continuous consumption. We need only eradicate immigration except for the very best of the upper classes, eradicate through constraint on reproduction the lower classes, and eradicate the ability for non-kin to compete with us for control over the production of commons, and the status signals that are the reward for assisting in the production of those commons. Unfortunately we have not learned to constrain the impulses of women to satisfy the need to give (free endorphins for redistributing the production of others), and we have not learned to constrain the impulses of all (as did the communists) to satisfy the need to feel ‘above’ someone, or that they are not the low rung on the ladder, (free endorphins for false status signals), or the need to demonstrate status through conspicuous consumption (endorphins for possessing that which others do not), or the need to virtue signal (free endorphins for empty talk or gossip). Other societies, including ours, in much of our history, have suppressed unearned signals as a form of theft. It seems like this more than anything, combined with democracy that let it loose, has been the reason we are not happy. The hamster wheel of consumption is merely selling us the curse of Sisyphus by the promise of a utopia, the same way a drug dealer sells drugs, a fast food chain sells sugars and fats, a dietary supplement manufacturer sells ‘vitamins’ an advertiser sells status, a politician sells socialism or communism, or priest and his prophet sells life after death or some number of virgins. They’re all lies. Happiness is simple. Working to produce gains, not to forestall losses. And we can only forestall losses if we have the inventory that is sufficient to live off our gains.

  • I think it is better to say that our conquests were made for profit, but our pro

    I think it is better to say that our conquests were made for profit, but our profit was compensation for the cost of dragging mankind out of tyranny, ignorance, poverty, starvation, disease. And that we started with violence, moved to law, moved to commerce, and then to ostracization from or access to, the prosperity we created. We did the best we could. We didn’t often do it well. But will still did it and no other culture did. Or even came close. (Well, technically, it sure looks like Cyrus the Great actually tried. Gotta give Cyrus and the Dariuses their due. They tried. They had engineering. They just didn’t have truth (administration) like the romans did.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-03 14:47:00 UTC

  • THE FOUR STANDARD HOME DESIGNS a) Hot or Temperate Climate: Defensive, Suburban,

    THE FOUR STANDARD HOME DESIGNS

    a) Hot or Temperate Climate:

    Defensive, Suburban, Urban

    One floor, Double-walled, air-gap or insulated, brick or concrete block, with exterior stucco, interior plaster, in traditional courtyard design, with tall interior facing windows, with interior-facing roof, with downspouts (filtered) feeding central cistern (water pool).

    Minimum interior wet-walls, Traditional under-window steam heat, off traditional boiler, off natural-fuel iron stove. Every civilization discovered it. Any man can build it. And it doesn’t get any better than that. Start with one building, add a wing at a time, until you have a donut. Main, kitchen, dining. Wing left bedrooms. Wing right Living Room and Office. Wing Main Entry, Parents/Grandparents Apt (or workshop or shop)

    b) Temperate climate

    Territorial views. Non-defensive (security through remoteness)

    Reverse the Donut. Cross Design. Mix of one and two floors. Maximum External glass. Main house kitchen, living vaulted ceiling. Right arm, entry and storage. Left Arm Dining. head-arm, Upstairs master suite, downstairs Children’s bedrooms.

    c) Cold Climate:

    Cube. Raise it. (“Medieval Keep design”) Full basement, only half underground, first floor windows > man-height off the ground.

    9′ ceilings, tall windows, defensive shutters. Basement storage, main food formal living dining, second bedrooms and family space, third master suite in roof with dormers.

    d) Hard Freeze Climate / “modern tents’.

    Cottage. Stick houses are cheap, can be insulated like hell, and resist earthquakes. But they are ‘cottages’ not ‘houses’ and certainly not defensible, or durable keeps. And they have no sound dampening or thermal mass.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-30 11:57:00 UTC

  • Dear Media Companies. Entertainment is a fashion business. As specialization inc

    Dear Media Companies.

    Entertainment is a fashion business.

    As specialization increases and cost of production of content decreases, the value of capital and management decreases.

    What does this mean? Media companies (channels) have short life spans.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-30 08:01:00 UTC