Curt Doolittle

Theme: Productivity

  • A ‘job’ is an invention of the consumer-capitalist era. Prior: Producer, Craftsm

    A ‘job’ is an invention of the consumer-capitalist era. Prior: Producer, Craftsman, Profession. Capitalists organize prod. at scale.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-23 12:54:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/734729235290574849

    Reply addressees: @pmarca

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/734516865813250048

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/734516865813250048

  • VALUATIONS. (Obvious, but nice to see the data) —“The data reveals a consisten

    http://techcrunch.com/2015/06/05/what-we-know-from-a-decade-of-saas/SAAS VALUATIONS.

    (Obvious, but nice to see the data)

    —“The data reveals a consistent valuation range between 4x and 6x revenue, with 5x revenue as the all-time median. Times of euphoria, such as late 2013 through early 2014, and periods of depression, such as late 2008 through late 2010, are also easy to identify.

    Market cycles and company valuations will fluctuate, but we have over a decade of trading data on more than 50 companies that suggests a steady-state valuation of 4x to 6x revenue for the median public SaaS company. We believe most investors have internalized a 5x multiple as a benchmark for a steady-state SaaS company.

    It is interesting to look at individual companies in the index and see if this rule of thumb applies to every company. Salesforce, the largest SaaS company in the world, trades at 7x today. It traded as low as 2x in late 2008 and up to 10x before settling where it is today, noticeably following the cycles of the index. In other words, while it may get a slight premium for its leadership position it still fits into the framework.”—

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-19 07:59:00 UTC

  • Flip it again: why is it that we should continue to move people to capital inste

    Flip it again: why is it that we should continue to move people to capital instead of moving capital to people? Profit?

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-15 20:04:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/731938294515257344

    Reply addressees: @Noahpinion

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/731934059979411456

    IN REPLY TO:

    @Noahpinion

    @curtdoolittle Shouldn’t risky investing be risky?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/731934059979411456

  • The open question is whether they (we) have the knowledge and understanding to c

    The open question is whether they (we) have the knowledge and understanding to coordinate capital at any scale. 😉 Possibly.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-14 18:04:54 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/731545841442422784

    Reply addressees: @bierlingm

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/731532684065972224

    IN REPLY TO:

    @bierlingm

    .@curtdoolittle The technological caste finally has a direct means by which to coordinate production of innovation. https://t.co/ZAT091Wx2R

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/731532684065972224

  • THE CONVERSION OF ANGLO CIVILIZATION FROM PRODUCTIVE AND MORAL TO COMMERCIAL AND

    THE CONVERSION OF ANGLO CIVILIZATION FROM PRODUCTIVE AND MORAL TO COMMERCIAL AND FINANCIAL

    Think of how hard it is to convert a hunter gatherer people to an agrarian economy. From where you know everyone to where you don’t.

    Think of how hard it is to convert an agrarian economy to a mixed-craft merchant economy. You don’t need much trust but you need to at least be able to secure your territory and capital. Where you don’t know who produces what or where it came from. And where organization of production becomes invisible to you.

    Think of how hard it is to convert your economy to consumer capitalism because your trust is high enough that you can create long term contracts. Where cooperation is achieved through the pooling of capital in large amounts so that it can be concentrated to produce lots of goods and services cheaply.

    Think of how hard it is to convert your economy to a financial economy, where you make money from the process of credit alone. Where you are in fact assisting in organizing the production of goods and services as your primary method of production.

    In each of these cases you are making wealth because you’ve produced the commons we call TRUST : reciprocal insurance, and evolved from a laborer, to a craftsman, to an entrepreneur, to a financier. And you’ve moved your entire economy through that same evolution.

    But as your people evolve through this hierarchy, you produce institutions that assist you in producing records, in resolving disputes, and in developing habits that make resolution of disputes unnecessary.

    What you LOSE is the ability to observe externalities.

    Financialization has produced profound externalities that we have no learned how to RECORD, and ACCOUNT for.

    The cumulative effect of our financialization, which in itself may not be a bad thing but an heroic thing, is that we do not account for the externalities produced under the various transactions.

    Why? well off the gold standard we have no method of measurement. And secondly, the progressives have ‘gambled’ upon the fallacy that technology and growth would persist forever – which it hasn’t, won’t, and can’t.

    We departed the empirical society. We became a society of ‘hope’ or ‘wishful thinking’ or ‘fanciful thinking’, instead. The germans remained an empirical people. We became a moral (british) and utopian(american) rather than empirical people.

    It’s fixable. But it won’t be pretty. a 30 year bear market is a pretty understandable thing.

    (h/t: Benjamin Steigmann)

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-13 07:25:00 UTC

  • Ukrainian women see a dress they like in a magazine. What do they do? They buy t

    Ukrainian women see a dress they like in a magazine. What do they do? They buy the fabric And either make it themselves or have someone make it for them.

    Freaking awesome.

    You can spend your time doing all sorts of things. The only choice we have in life is that.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-09 08:49:00 UTC

  • ON REISMAN’S CAPITALISM (from elsewhere) It’s an exceptional work, and it’s prob

    ON REISMAN’S CAPITALISM

    (from elsewhere)

    It’s an exceptional work, and it’s probably timeless. I’ve thought about writing a criticism of it in order to make it even better, and by consequence Austrian Economics (natural economics) even better.

    But this brief overview.

    All philosophies are class philosophies. Most if not all, are written by the middle class as a rebellion against the status quo, in a bid for rotation of power.

    The question is (a) what resources, geography, and competitors are near, (b) what gives a family, tribe, nation, or polity competitive advantage against competitors, (b) once competitive advantage is obtained, then what organization of property, production, and decision making perpetuates and improves competitive advantage.

    In this sense, Reissman’s Capitalism, like Natural Law, presents us with an ideal. But competing polities must make contracts within natural law, and within capitalism, that preserve their assets: optimum rates of innovation, given optimum human capital, without exposing the polity to vulnerability from competitors inside and out.

    This is the failure of ‘bottom up’ constructions of Natural Law, Common Law, and Capitalism. They tell us that which is law, not contract with one another, just as physics tells us what is law not engineering – the contract with the universe.

    Note that I don’t consider mises an Austrian(natural law) but a Polish or Ukrainian Jewish anarchist. And I certainly don’t consider Rothbard an Austrian, but a Russian and Polish jewish anarchist. Although polish, Ukrainian, and Russian jews in that era were indifferent. Austrian Economics and Anarchic economics are different. They share only the avoidance of authority. But Austrian economics seeks social science in order to preserve german sovereignty. Anarchic economics seeks to avoid bearing the cost of the commons in order to preserve separatism. Austrian economics seeks to create liberty as the most competitive commons under natural law. Rothbard and Mises seek to escape any commons whatsoever.

    Why? The landed agrarian legal aristocracy of commons producers of versus the un-landed religious middle class of commons free-riders. We carry our group competitive strategy with us at all times as metaphysical and moral value judgements and we cannot escape relying upon introspection for decidability in moral and metaphysical judgements.

    So I think this is the correct positioning for reissman’s capitalism: it is a work of natural law – almost. I think it can be made into one.

    But it is not a manual for surviving competition. In no small part because we compete for human capital. And human capital chooses rationally not ideologically. And commons are a competitive advantage.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-09 03:50:00 UTC

  • The south should have seceded. Physical Slavery is economically inferior to cons

    The south should have seceded. Physical Slavery is economically inferior to consumer capitalism (credit slavery).

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-05 08:48:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/728144450573074432

    Reply addressees: @AtlanticCent @caerwyn45

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/728143100422422529

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/728143100422422529

  • CONSULTING COMPANY HIERARCHY VERTICAL AXIS: 6) Strategy Work. ( Presentations on

    CONSULTING COMPANY HIERARCHY

    VERTICAL AXIS:

    6) Strategy Work.

    ( Presentations on Financial, Operational,Market Goals – ie: empirical analysis and planning – big players)

    5) Consulting work

    ( Presentations on initiatives: usually consensus building or research work. )

    4) Project Work

    (deliverables – responsibility for p/l)

    3) Production work

    (many small deliverables)

    2) Outsourcing

    (housing staff under management of customer)

    1) Staffing

    ( recruiting and supplying talent for project work)

    0) Temp

    ( recruiting and supplying talent for short term work)

    HORIZONTAL AXIS

    0) Scale.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-04 03:50:00 UTC

  • RT @FriedrichHayek: The secret to Keynes is: 1) he didn’t know any capital theor

    RT @FriedrichHayek: The secret to Keynes is: 1) he didn’t know any capital theory & 2) his main efforts was manipulate things so Britain ne…

    Source date (UTC): 2016-04-30 16:53:38 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/726454476886937600