Curt Doolittle

Theme: Productivity

  • Things HBR doesn’t tell you. Entrepreneurs are largely born. If you require insp

    Things HBR doesn’t tell you.

    Entrepreneurs are largely born. If you require inspiration rather than relief from frustration you don’t have the gene.

    Small/medium business owners have the highest average income our if every single occupation.

    Opportunities can be captured by many means:

    By your incentive to pursue an otherwise unprofitable niche market.

    ( tech services )

    By your disruption of an inefficient cost structure.

    ( aged bureaucracy )

    By your invention of a replacement of marginal difference.

    ( shrinking disk drives )

    By applying credit to an efficient but disrupt able market.

    ( big box stores )

    By appealing to greed and fantasy.

    ( gambling )

    By taking advantage of taboos, laws, and regulation.

    ( black market and drugs )

    By selling harmless pseudoscience.

    ( dietary supplements )

    By taking advantage of hardship

    ( mortgage schemes )

    By perpetuating a fraud. ( financial services)

    By the use of bribery. (Corruption)

    By violent coercion. ( organised crime )

    By conspiracy ( govt )

    By conquest. (War )

    Ideas are neither scarce nor special. Customers, marketing, sales and distribution channels as scare everyone and special.

    It is almost impossible to preserve customer focus of employee and management effort. People seek to avoid it like the unpredictable work that it is.

    Credit capacity is more influential than product quality.

    We try to be cunning to get attention but customers just care about the truth. Tell them.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-10-18 12:27:00 UTC

  • I will propose the third angle: That property rights increase incentives, ideati

    http://johnquiggin.com/2016/10/16/locke-nozick-locke/#comment-274067John

    I will propose the third angle:

    That property rights increase incentives, ideation, productivity, risk tolerance, opportunity creation, monetary and economic velocity. And as a consequence produce higher returns ( commissions or taxes ) for the minority who imposed property rights over the objections of the rent seeking majority. And as a consequence upward distribution of returns slowly domesticates ( reduces the reproduction of ) the lower classes, further accelerating cooperation.

    This is in fact the process that occurred in Europe.

    Painful truths are still truths.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-10-16 14:04:00 UTC

  • The Origins of the Left’s Effeminate R-Selection Bias

    I think what is abhorrent to leftists is that business and productivity are innately competitive and consist of attempting to outwit other tribes of males for market territory. This is antithetical to the r-selection instincts of females and their effeminate offspring and the sexually inverted ((( tribes ))).

    In their world they cannot compete and seek consensus and non-conflict and reciprocality. They do not see competition as calculation by trial and error of efficiencies in the interest of all. They sense only the short term experience rather than judge long term consequences. Hence why we must never take the feminine or effeminate opinion seriously. It is a temporal blindness and a moral blindness just like Color blindness. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine

  • The Origins of the Left’s Effeminate R-Selection Bias

    I think what is abhorrent to leftists is that business and productivity are innately competitive and consist of attempting to outwit other tribes of males for market territory. This is antithetical to the r-selection instincts of females and their effeminate offspring and the sexually inverted ((( tribes ))).

    In their world they cannot compete and seek consensus and non-conflict and reciprocality. They do not see competition as calculation by trial and error of efficiencies in the interest of all. They sense only the short term experience rather than judge long term consequences. Hence why we must never take the feminine or effeminate opinion seriously. It is a temporal blindness and a moral blindness just like Color blindness. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine

  • The First Property Of Production Is Time. And Money Is Its Commensurable Store.

    In the past ten years I have not been able to defeat the theory that money literally stores time ( saved by or spent in production ) and that our claim that it is a store of value is a mistaken subjective perception given the utility in accounting rather than an objective description of its causality. When we cooperate we save time. When we divide labor we save more. When we exchange productively we save more.

    We are not wealthier in time than our distant ancestors, we have – depending upon how we wish to describe the phenomenon – made everything cheaper in cost of time while at the same time holding caloric expenditure relatively constant. And thanks to the nineteenth And twentieth centuries, dramatically reduced the cost in cellular damage per moment. Even if we have offset it a bit with chemical preservatives, carbohydrates and sugars. So all increases in productivity ( not aggregate productivity, but case specific productivity) reflect time savings. Just as all thefts and frauds its loss. Now we could also restate time saved as time created, or time made available rather than time saved. But I think doing so enters the domain of mathematical Platonism. No matter what we do, money is only able to influence others by paying them in saved time to prefer spending their time on what we desire of them versus the alternatives. Comments
    Mark King —So, to borrow money is to borrow time saved by others (living on borrowed time so to speak.) To default on a loan is to have literally wasted someone’s time.–
     
    Davin Eastley —^That is correct indeed.–
     
    Jason Conway —This almost seems like you’ve described the commoditization of time through the use of commodificaton.–

  • The First Property Of Production Is Time. And Money Is Its Commensurable Store.

    In the past ten years I have not been able to defeat the theory that money literally stores time ( saved by or spent in production ) and that our claim that it is a store of value is a mistaken subjective perception given the utility in accounting rather than an objective description of its causality. When we cooperate we save time. When we divide labor we save more. When we exchange productively we save more.

    We are not wealthier in time than our distant ancestors, we have – depending upon how we wish to describe the phenomenon – made everything cheaper in cost of time while at the same time holding caloric expenditure relatively constant. And thanks to the nineteenth And twentieth centuries, dramatically reduced the cost in cellular damage per moment. Even if we have offset it a bit with chemical preservatives, carbohydrates and sugars. So all increases in productivity ( not aggregate productivity, but case specific productivity) reflect time savings. Just as all thefts and frauds its loss. Now we could also restate time saved as time created, or time made available rather than time saved. But I think doing so enters the domain of mathematical Platonism. No matter what we do, money is only able to influence others by paying them in saved time to prefer spending their time on what we desire of them versus the alternatives. Comments
    Mark King —So, to borrow money is to borrow time saved by others (living on borrowed time so to speak.) To default on a loan is to have literally wasted someone’s time.–
     
    Davin Eastley —^That is correct indeed.–
     
    Jason Conway —This almost seems like you’ve described the commoditization of time through the use of commodificaton.–

  • Exchanging Opportunity for Parasitism for Opportunity for Homesteading.

    Proximity decreases opportunity costs. We can also argue that as a consequence of reduced opportunity costs we can create opportunities otherwise impossible. And as a consequence, we compete to discover and homestead those opportunities. We make this density possibly by the high cost of forgoing opportunities for imposing costs. Thereby preserving cooperation despite an equal decrease in the opportunity for parasitism. As such we exchange the increased cost of forgoing opportunity for parasitism for the decreased costs of opportunity for homesteading opportunities.

    This concept is missing from the literature. We focus too much upon money that provides numerous additional discounts. And we focus too little operationally on the creation of conditions that make trade and money possible. This oversight is related to the other errors of the enlightenment

  • Exchanging Opportunity for Parasitism for Opportunity for Homesteading.

    Proximity decreases opportunity costs. We can also argue that as a consequence of reduced opportunity costs we can create opportunities otherwise impossible. And as a consequence, we compete to discover and homestead those opportunities. We make this density possibly by the high cost of forgoing opportunities for imposing costs. Thereby preserving cooperation despite an equal decrease in the opportunity for parasitism. As such we exchange the increased cost of forgoing opportunity for parasitism for the decreased costs of opportunity for homesteading opportunities.

    This concept is missing from the literature. We focus too much upon money that provides numerous additional discounts. And we focus too little operationally on the creation of conditions that make trade and money possible. This oversight is related to the other errors of the enlightenment

  • Another way to look at compensation is that we are rewarded by our degree of unh

    Another way to look at compensation is that we are rewarded by our degree of unhappiness in the service of others. This is why happiness goes down in most highly compensated jobs. Why people in lower paying helping and service jobs are happier than people in highly compensated competitive jobs. And why there is greater exit from highly paid competitive careers than there is from the lower compensated helpful careers.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-10-07 06:31:00 UTC

  • ***The world is built subtractively: we seek to make things cheaper. We cannot m

    ***The world is built subtractively: we seek to make things cheaper. We cannot make time and energy, we can only save them. We cannot make liberty we can only suppress parasitism.***

    Source date (UTC): 2016-10-03 20:57:00 UTC