Curt Doolittle

Theme: Productivity

  • I have been meaning to ask what you think about MMT for some time now. So, have

    —I have been meaning to ask what you think about MMT for some time now. So, have you heard of MMT before and what do you think?—

    Curt Doolittle

    What I’ve stated in the previous few posts is pure Keynesianism, however, I used it in the New Keynesian model, directed at growth rather than just employment.

    The criticism we should levy is of Fiat Money that in issuing these stocks (fiat money) the interest is privatized rather than retained as one of the primary income sources of the state.

    This was an intention, in the original design, as fear that the state would destroy the economy as it has in the past if legislation made possible the runaway issuance of currency.

    MMT makes claims I disagree with, and creates hazards I disagree with. In particular, that no government can go bankrupt – which while LEGALLY true – doesn’t mean it’s PRACTICALLY true, as we have seen many sovereign nations with fiat money produce runaway inflation and in the case of venezuela at present, starvation.

    The problem with fiat money is lack of rule of law. In other words, the constitution needs to forbid the state from arbitrary (discretionary) use of money.

    In some sense, one of the principle problems of 21st century economics has been to attempt to discover some ‘target’ (measurement) that would allow us to reduce the issuance of money to rule of law (a formula) and place it into the constitution, thereby removing discretion over its use.

    In some sense, this is an example of the the conversion by the (((socialists))) from rule of law (non-discretionary rule) to majority rule (discretionary rule): it is even harder to trust a government with fiat money than it was when first issued.

    The solution isn’t very difficult. There are no provisions in the constitution against even suggesting certain acts as there were for treason. And it is this certainty of punishment alone that will prevent this kind of behavior in the market for information, legislation and regulation.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-26 08:00:00 UTC

  • Q&A: —“Would you mind detailing the hard currency problem? I still can’t get m

    Q&A: —“Would you mind detailing the hard currency problem? I still can’t get my head around why a fixed amount of currency is problematic.”— Bob Moran

    Curt Doolittle

    Lets say that the only currency you have to work with is gold and silver coin. Now, if, as a country, you are a net exporter, you will accumulate coins in exchange for your exports. But if you are a net importer (you’re wealthy) you will low on coins, the cost of coins will increase, and therefore the cost of imported goods will increase, and your economy will stall. Those are two extremes. In the middle, coins circulate and credit circulates, and consumption slows because prices increase, simply because the cost of coins themselves – that are necessary for trade – increases. This continues until some niche markets resort to barter. Now barter is a high risk, because it isn’t liquid like money (coin) is.

    Instead of coin, all governments slowly moved to ‘shares’. Paper money is not money per se (a commodity, or a token exchangeable for a commodity), but a share in the economy of the issuer. And like commercial shares, its dilutable. So when the price of money increases (interest rates), the government issues more shares to maintain a stable price of money (shares), so that there is no artificial shortage of money (money substitute: shares) so that productivity isn’t going to pay for the scarcity of money, and continues to pay for consumption and trade, and the economy continues.

    Governments (federal reserves, central banks, etc) function for the simple purpose of ensuring relative price stability of money, by maintaining a money supply at levels that hold it steady.

    The problem is, governments, once they have this power, spend money they don’t and can’t have, which creates a constant rate of inflation as well. Inflation destroys prices and savings and assets.

    The only way to preserve savings then, is to invest in things that appreciate over time (land, stocks, etc) but in general it is nearly impossible to stay ahead of the rate of inflation. so you must work constantly to prevent your money from evaporating.

    This creates the treadmill that we live under.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-25 15:44:00 UTC

  • FICTION VERSUS LAW (profoundly important) FICTION ( possibility – opportunity –

    FICTION VERSUS LAW

    (profoundly important)

    FICTION ( possibility – opportunity – productivity )

    VS

    LAW ( decidability – limits – parasitism )

    Of the following, which is fiction, which is law?

    A) Golden Rule : Do unto others as you would have done unto you.

    B) Silver Rule: Do not unto others as you would not have done unto you.

    Fiction and Law serve as the western equivalent of Ying and Yang.

    But our western model innovates, and Ying and Yang stagnates.

    PETERSON: FICTIONALISM (SELLING), DOOLITTLE: LAW (TELLING)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-25 12:50:00 UTC

  • On Unions

    ON UNIONS The unions made common mistakes of overreach. They began with the moral: safety, liability, minimum wages, profit sharing, and replacing with cheaper workers (arbitrage). But then proceeded with overreaches that varied from moral hazard: demands for impossible future claims: continuous increases and pensions; then to the immoral: mandatory membership, mandatory fees, and fostering endemic corruption; then to the violation of natural law: interfering in the political process. It’s a shock to capitalists and free marketers raised on the myth of constant growth made possible under the agrarian and industrial (hydrocarbon) eras, and prohibiting temporal labor arbitrage is perhaps hard for the layman to understand when it occurs across decades of time rather than across national borders, but men are not commodities and their marketability declines rapidly after choice of first opportunity – and seizing all the ‘best’ time at the lowest price under promise of future rewards is merely an act of fraud. So it is all too easy to socialize uncompetitiveness and privatize commons into the hands of investors and capitalists. Most capitalists cannot compete under free trade because profits would be much smaller. Contrary to libertarian dogma, and contrary to anglo bourgeois values, while the puritan/manorial work ethic is an unquestionable good, and while rule of law assisting in capital concentration and formation is an unquestionable good, as a good Propertarian we query ‘But what are the limits of that good? Because there exist no unlimited theories and therefore no unlimited goods.’ And we find that it is possible to socialize losses and privatize gains if we do not perform full accounting. And a full accounting only ends when we have reduced all accounts to ‘time’. Because it is ‘time’ that is the currency we trade.

  • On Unions

    ON UNIONS The unions made common mistakes of overreach. They began with the moral: safety, liability, minimum wages, profit sharing, and replacing with cheaper workers (arbitrage). But then proceeded with overreaches that varied from moral hazard: demands for impossible future claims: continuous increases and pensions; then to the immoral: mandatory membership, mandatory fees, and fostering endemic corruption; then to the violation of natural law: interfering in the political process. It’s a shock to capitalists and free marketers raised on the myth of constant growth made possible under the agrarian and industrial (hydrocarbon) eras, and prohibiting temporal labor arbitrage is perhaps hard for the layman to understand when it occurs across decades of time rather than across national borders, but men are not commodities and their marketability declines rapidly after choice of first opportunity – and seizing all the ‘best’ time at the lowest price under promise of future rewards is merely an act of fraud. So it is all too easy to socialize uncompetitiveness and privatize commons into the hands of investors and capitalists. Most capitalists cannot compete under free trade because profits would be much smaller. Contrary to libertarian dogma, and contrary to anglo bourgeois values, while the puritan/manorial work ethic is an unquestionable good, and while rule of law assisting in capital concentration and formation is an unquestionable good, as a good Propertarian we query ‘But what are the limits of that good? Because there exist no unlimited theories and therefore no unlimited goods.’ And we find that it is possible to socialize losses and privatize gains if we do not perform full accounting. And a full accounting only ends when we have reduced all accounts to ‘time’. Because it is ‘time’ that is the currency we trade.

  • ( There is a reason a phd takes six or seven years, and to be good in a craft or

    ( There is a reason a phd takes six or seven years, and to be good in a craft or career takes eight to ten. we…. humans…. are….. sloooooowwww. )

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-22 16:42:00 UTC

  • i .. am… not .. productive … today. Love the god of binary. The god of binar

    i .. am… not .. productive … today.

    Love the god of binary.

    The god of binary is your friend – sometimes.

    He demands sacrifices of time.

    And he is angered by insults.

    He considers syntax errors insulting.

    I make as many typos in code as I do in verse…. lol

    I insult the god of binary all day long.

    sigh. lol

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-22 16:25:00 UTC

  • STATE BUSINESS ALLIANCES Forms of subsidy to companies that engage in internatio

    STATE BUSINESS ALLIANCES

    Forms of subsidy to companies that engage in international trade produces multipliers. The math has been done. That’s why it continues. In fact, throughout history, the state-biz partnership in international trade has been a requirement at worst, and the central source of economic competition at best.

    The problem with state-business relations occurs when (a) consumers have no standing in court against violations of reciprocity in the domestic market, and (b) politicians grant rights and privileges in the domestic market (c) when zombie (dead) corporations are kept alive for political reasons.

    In the american case, corporations pay the highest taxes in the world. But our total tax rate is relatively low. Most advanced countries ( meaning those with auditable financial systems) use VAT tax increases to offset corporate taxes. But you can easily see where that goes….

    Libertarianism benefits from a little knowledge of economics, with a heavy dose of obscurantist moralizing. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. And that is why there are many passionate libertarians, and only a half dozen libertarian ‘intellectuals’. Its because once you possess more than a little knowledge you either choose conservatism (long term and eugenic) or social democracy (short term and dysgenic).

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-17 08:59:00 UTC

  • Can Vancouver, Bc Become A New Silicon Valley?

    It’s unlikely. (Spoken as someone who has purchased a Canadian tech company)
    1. Canadian work ethic and 100 hour weeks at startups are incompatible.
    2. Employment regulations place too high a burden on small businesses.
    3. Shareholder requirements in Canada are too burdensome for high risk opportunities.
    4. Consumer banking in Canada is exceptional but commercial banking is like dealing with the government – depressing, incompetent, and ignorant.
    5. The VC community (if you want to call it that) is not competent in tech – better in mining and resources.
    6. The university system has no peer to California or NY/Boston
    7. Canada lacks sufficient population to produce sufficient engineers, capable of taking sufficient risks. At present it takes 500M people in a market to produce competitive intellectual work products at the level of global powers.

    https://www.quora.com/Can-Vancouver-BC-become-a-new-Silicon-Valley

  • Can Vancouver, Bc Become A New Silicon Valley?

    It’s unlikely. (Spoken as someone who has purchased a Canadian tech company)
    1. Canadian work ethic and 100 hour weeks at startups are incompatible.
    2. Employment regulations place too high a burden on small businesses.
    3. Shareholder requirements in Canada are too burdensome for high risk opportunities.
    4. Consumer banking in Canada is exceptional but commercial banking is like dealing with the government – depressing, incompetent, and ignorant.
    5. The VC community (if you want to call it that) is not competent in tech – better in mining and resources.
    6. The university system has no peer to California or NY/Boston
    7. Canada lacks sufficient population to produce sufficient engineers, capable of taking sufficient risks. At present it takes 500M people in a market to produce competitive intellectual work products at the level of global powers.

    https://www.quora.com/Can-Vancouver-BC-become-a-new-Silicon-Valley