Theme: Productivity

  • Why Don’t We MIX Economies?

    Sep 05, 2016 12:48pm WHY IS IT THAT WE DON”T MIX ECONOMIES?

    • Military (Slavery) – labor dependent
    • Communist (Serfdom) – skill dependent
    • Democratic Socialist (freedom) – mentally dependent
    • Capitalist (liberty) – capital dependent

    If nations are smaller there are more ‘top slots’ but each having less free capital for use in corruption available. All era’s face information problems when they scale. This is ours. The answer is always the same: information and institutions.

  • Profit From Our Rule Is Our Reward For Producing The Transcendence of Man

    Sep 06, 2016 8:43am One theorizes and profits from theorizing out of self-defense. One organizes and profits from organizing out of self defense. One designs and calculates and profits from designing and calculating out of self-defense. One manages and profits from managing out of self-defense. One labors and profits from labor out of self-defense. We progress by our defense against the dark forces of nature, time, ignorance, and man’s design for predictability, stagnation, and parasitism by women and predation by men. We must rule. We must rule for defense alone. But by our rule we transcend man. By the rule of all others, man rarely transcends at all, and others seek to destroy us.

  • Q&A: “Curt: What Defines Middle Class?”

    —“What defines the middle class according to you? I go by the British definition” — Dawid Wella The common definition is: —“the social group between the upper(not working) and working (laboring) classes, including professional and business workers and their families(managerial).”— I would use: ***”People who calculate, organize, manage, production, distribution, and trade.”*** Because I think it is the best book yet available, I tend to use Paul Fussel’s book “Class”, and most people who read it are forever changed by it. THE BRITISH AND AMERICAN SYSTEMS The British system, which is more economically descriptive, if expanded, would be superior to the American which is politically descriptive. We have simply had ‘diversity’ longer, so we have ‘softer’ categories in order to eliminate the ‘uncomfortable’ truth that we’re racially stratified as well as occupationally stratified. The British and American Class Models British ???? – American Upper Out of Sight Class (the 80 major money families in the states) British ???? – American Upper Class (live on money) For example, our tech people are hardly classifiable as elites, other than perhaps the Gates’ who have made the transition from commercial to entirely humanitarian occupation. British Elite – American Upper Middle Class (in America, we refer to elites as people who have political power, not economic power, and who hold utopian visions of the future.) Members of the elite class are the top 6% of British society with very high economic capital (particularly savings), high social capital, and very ‘highbrow’ cultural capital. Occupations such as chief executive officers, IT and telecommunications directors, marketing and sales directors; functional managers and directors, barristers and judges, financial managers, higher education teachers,[24] dentists, doctors and advertising and public relations directors were strongly represented.[25] However, those in the established and ‘acceptable’ professions, such as academia, law and medicine are more traditional upper middle class identifiers with IT and sales being the preserve of the economic if not social middle class. British Established middle class – American Middle Class Members of the established middle class, about 25% of British society, reported high economic capital, high status of mean social contacts, and both high highbrow and high emerging cultural capital. Well-represented occupations included electrical engineers, occupational therapists, midwives, environmental professionals, police officers, quality assurance and regulatory professionals, town planning officials, and special needs teaching professionals.[26] British Technical middle class – American Lower Middle Class The technical middle class, about 6% of British society, shows high economic capital, very high status of social contacts, but relatively few contacts reported, and moderate cultural capital. Occupations represented include medical radiographers, aircraft pilots, pharmacists, natural and social science professionals and physical scientists, and business, research, and administrative positions.[27] British New affluent workers – American Upper Working Class New affluent workers, about 15% of British society, show moderately good economic capital, relatively poor status of social contacts, though highly varied, and moderate highbrow but good emerging cultural capital. Occupations include electricians and electrical fitters; postal workers; retail cashiers and checkout operatives; plumbers and heating and ventilation engineers; sales and retail assistants; housing officers; kitchen and catering assistants; quality assurance technicians.[27] British Traditional working class – American Middle Working Class The traditional working class, about 15% of British society, shows relatively poor economic capital, but some housing assets, few social contacts, and low highbrow and emerging cultural capital. Typical occupations include electrical and electronics technicians; care workers; cleaners; van drivers; electricians; residential, day, and domiciliary care [27] British Emergent service sector – American lower working class The emergent service sector, about 19% of British society, shows relatively poor economic capital, but reasonable household income, moderate social contacts, high emerging (but low highbrow) cultural capital. Typical occupations include bar staff, chefs, nursing auxiliaries and assistants, assemblers and routine operatives, care workers, elementary storage occupations, customer service occupations, musicians.[27] British Precariat – American upper proletarian class The precariat, about 15% of British society, shows poor economic capital, and the lowest scores on every other criterion. Typical occupations include cleaners, van drivers, care workers, carpenters and joiners, caretakers, leisure and travel service occupations, shopkeepers and proprietors, and retail cashiers. British ???? – American Lower proletarian class British ???? – American out-of-sight lower class. PROPERTARIANISM However, in Propertarianism I do not create a single hierarchy, but three overlapping ‘cones’, where our upper classes specialize in one or more of the three methods of coercion: 1) The Priesthood: talk/gossip/rallying/shaming, Academy, Politics. 2) The Judiciary: violence, order, law, war 3) The Burghers: trade, enterpreneurship, finance, treasury. The Four Middle Classes Criteria 1) Genetic Middle Class (reproductive, associative, economic value – ie: reproductively desirable) 2) Social Middle Class (bourgeoise manners, ethics, morals, traditions) 3) Occupational Middle Class (managerial or small business) 4) Economic Middle Class (free capital for consumption and signaling – ie: home-owner) To some degree these overlap considerably. But there is quite a bit of rotation in and out of the middle, even if there very little rotation out of the upper middle (professional class), lots of rotation out of the lower upper class (financiers and politicals) and upper-class (families who maintain excellence over many generations). So I use all four circles, and I tend to suggest that it’s all genetics, and it’s whether you succeed socially, occupationally, and economically that can change the appearance of what class you’re in. American culture is still fairly favorable for anyone in the middle class to move up socially, economically, and occupationally, and by offspring, some small chance, if you marry well, genetically. SUMMARY the middle class contains those people in the four middle class criteria, and divided by specialization into the people who persuade, people who trade, and people who defend limits. Cheers
  • Q&A: “Curt: What Defines Middle Class?”

    —“What defines the middle class according to you? I go by the British definition” — Dawid Wella The common definition is: —“the social group between the upper(not working) and working (laboring) classes, including professional and business workers and their families(managerial).”— I would use: ***”People who calculate, organize, manage, production, distribution, and trade.”*** Because I think it is the best book yet available, I tend to use Paul Fussel’s book “Class”, and most people who read it are forever changed by it. THE BRITISH AND AMERICAN SYSTEMS The British system, which is more economically descriptive, if expanded, would be superior to the American which is politically descriptive. We have simply had ‘diversity’ longer, so we have ‘softer’ categories in order to eliminate the ‘uncomfortable’ truth that we’re racially stratified as well as occupationally stratified. The British and American Class Models British ???? – American Upper Out of Sight Class (the 80 major money families in the states) British ???? – American Upper Class (live on money) For example, our tech people are hardly classifiable as elites, other than perhaps the Gates’ who have made the transition from commercial to entirely humanitarian occupation. British Elite – American Upper Middle Class (in America, we refer to elites as people who have political power, not economic power, and who hold utopian visions of the future.) Members of the elite class are the top 6% of British society with very high economic capital (particularly savings), high social capital, and very ‘highbrow’ cultural capital. Occupations such as chief executive officers, IT and telecommunications directors, marketing and sales directors; functional managers and directors, barristers and judges, financial managers, higher education teachers,[24] dentists, doctors and advertising and public relations directors were strongly represented.[25] However, those in the established and ‘acceptable’ professions, such as academia, law and medicine are more traditional upper middle class identifiers with IT and sales being the preserve of the economic if not social middle class. British Established middle class – American Middle Class Members of the established middle class, about 25% of British society, reported high economic capital, high status of mean social contacts, and both high highbrow and high emerging cultural capital. Well-represented occupations included electrical engineers, occupational therapists, midwives, environmental professionals, police officers, quality assurance and regulatory professionals, town planning officials, and special needs teaching professionals.[26] British Technical middle class – American Lower Middle Class The technical middle class, about 6% of British society, shows high economic capital, very high status of social contacts, but relatively few contacts reported, and moderate cultural capital. Occupations represented include medical radiographers, aircraft pilots, pharmacists, natural and social science professionals and physical scientists, and business, research, and administrative positions.[27] British New affluent workers – American Upper Working Class New affluent workers, about 15% of British society, show moderately good economic capital, relatively poor status of social contacts, though highly varied, and moderate highbrow but good emerging cultural capital. Occupations include electricians and electrical fitters; postal workers; retail cashiers and checkout operatives; plumbers and heating and ventilation engineers; sales and retail assistants; housing officers; kitchen and catering assistants; quality assurance technicians.[27] British Traditional working class – American Middle Working Class The traditional working class, about 15% of British society, shows relatively poor economic capital, but some housing assets, few social contacts, and low highbrow and emerging cultural capital. Typical occupations include electrical and electronics technicians; care workers; cleaners; van drivers; electricians; residential, day, and domiciliary care [27] British Emergent service sector – American lower working class The emergent service sector, about 19% of British society, shows relatively poor economic capital, but reasonable household income, moderate social contacts, high emerging (but low highbrow) cultural capital. Typical occupations include bar staff, chefs, nursing auxiliaries and assistants, assemblers and routine operatives, care workers, elementary storage occupations, customer service occupations, musicians.[27] British Precariat – American upper proletarian class The precariat, about 15% of British society, shows poor economic capital, and the lowest scores on every other criterion. Typical occupations include cleaners, van drivers, care workers, carpenters and joiners, caretakers, leisure and travel service occupations, shopkeepers and proprietors, and retail cashiers. British ???? – American Lower proletarian class British ???? – American out-of-sight lower class. PROPERTARIANISM However, in Propertarianism I do not create a single hierarchy, but three overlapping ‘cones’, where our upper classes specialize in one or more of the three methods of coercion: 1) The Priesthood: talk/gossip/rallying/shaming, Academy, Politics. 2) The Judiciary: violence, order, law, war 3) The Burghers: trade, enterpreneurship, finance, treasury. The Four Middle Classes Criteria 1) Genetic Middle Class (reproductive, associative, economic value – ie: reproductively desirable) 2) Social Middle Class (bourgeoise manners, ethics, morals, traditions) 3) Occupational Middle Class (managerial or small business) 4) Economic Middle Class (free capital for consumption and signaling – ie: home-owner) To some degree these overlap considerably. But there is quite a bit of rotation in and out of the middle, even if there very little rotation out of the upper middle (professional class), lots of rotation out of the lower upper class (financiers and politicals) and upper-class (families who maintain excellence over many generations). So I use all four circles, and I tend to suggest that it’s all genetics, and it’s whether you succeed socially, occupationally, and economically that can change the appearance of what class you’re in. American culture is still fairly favorable for anyone in the middle class to move up socially, economically, and occupationally, and by offspring, some small chance, if you marry well, genetically. SUMMARY the middle class contains those people in the four middle class criteria, and divided by specialization into the people who persuade, people who trade, and people who defend limits. Cheers
  • Q&A: Economic Orders

    Aug 24, 2016 2:14pm
    Q&A: MR DOOLITTLE: QUESTION ABOUT ECONOMIC ORDERS —“Can you please elaborate on this “Once cheap labor stops, and marginal differences in knowledge are exhausted, what remains is a nation’s ability to dynamically reorganize production in real time, and to competitively innovate in real time.”
    Are you saying that productivity and innovation are not dependent on a nation’s wealth, size or population, but instead on how it organizes its existing resources to achieve maximum output? Basically, higher social capital = better long term growth and innovation?”— Yes. Thank you, I don’t think of putting it that way. But for example, Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, are small countries with small populations. But they are homogenous germanic peoples with high trust polities. This trust is just like having oil, gold, great farmland, or any other local asset. It’s an economic advantage. So all resources being equal, the competitive difference between societies would be determined by the absence of corruption and the presence of rule of law. The conflict generally comes with the tradeoff between military, trade, and credit capacity at scale, and ability to suppress corruption and tailor law, policy, and norms to the needs of local groups.
  • Q&A: Economic Orders

    Aug 24, 2016 2:14pm
    Q&A: MR DOOLITTLE: QUESTION ABOUT ECONOMIC ORDERS —“Can you please elaborate on this “Once cheap labor stops, and marginal differences in knowledge are exhausted, what remains is a nation’s ability to dynamically reorganize production in real time, and to competitively innovate in real time.”
    Are you saying that productivity and innovation are not dependent on a nation’s wealth, size or population, but instead on how it organizes its existing resources to achieve maximum output? Basically, higher social capital = better long term growth and innovation?”— Yes. Thank you, I don’t think of putting it that way. But for example, Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, are small countries with small populations. But they are homogenous germanic peoples with high trust polities. This trust is just like having oil, gold, great farmland, or any other local asset. It’s an economic advantage. So all resources being equal, the competitive difference between societies would be determined by the absence of corruption and the presence of rule of law. The conflict generally comes with the tradeoff between military, trade, and credit capacity at scale, and ability to suppress corruption and tailor law, policy, and norms to the needs of local groups.
  • In progress. The complete answer to the labor theory of value. We have the choic

    In progress.

    The complete answer to the labor theory of value.

    We have the choice to sell physical labor, skilled labor, management of labor )auditing), planning and calculating production, organising planning and production, choosing ( hiring ) organisations (financing) organisations of production, organising financing, and creating order itself.

    Of these tasks labor organises physicality and the rest organise men.

    Norms, laws, commons.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-09-16 00:43:00 UTC

  • that is to distract from the increase in consumption, end of fiat leverage, and

    that is to distract from the increase in consumption, end of fiat leverage, and re-regionalisation.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-09-03 15:00:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/772086883929165824

    Reply addressees: @barbarikon @JonHaidt

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/772079305434202112


    IN REPLY TO:

    @barbarikon

    @curtdoolittle @JonHaidt One big driver will be climate change, which will amplify all problems eg jihadism, war, mass migration, water etc.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/772079305434202112

  • LIBERAL:”The Democratic Allocation Of Dividends From Production Of Commons To Ra

    LIBERAL:”The Democratic Allocation Of Dividends From Production Of Commons To Raise The Standard Of Living Of Citizens.”


    Source date (UTC): 2016-09-03 11:43:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/772037198958956544

    Reply addressees: @HeerJeet @JonHaidt

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/771851568228409344


    IN REPLY TO:

    @HeerJeet

    @JonHaidt What liberal tradition? Locke’s support of slavery? J.S. Mill’s imperialism? FDR’s interment of Japanese Americans?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/771851568228409344

  • Just as war moved from physical to economic, why not Malthus from Food to Employ

    Just as war moved from physical to economic, why not Malthus from Food to Employability?


    Source date (UTC): 2016-09-03 10:54:31 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/772024973598818304

    Reply addressees: @HeerJeet @EdBurkenstock @StrolllTrollll @JonHaidt

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/771860475558567937


    IN REPLY TO:

    @HeerJeet

    @StrolllTrollll @JonHaidt A lot of what we rightly see as horrifyingly racist was mainstream in western culture from say 1500 to 1960s

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/771860475558567937