Men seek advantage through knowledge of production and systems and women seek advantage through knowledge of experiences and consumption. Why? Male status through capitalization via responsibility and female through consumption and w/o responsibility.
RT educates vs LFT inspires.
Source date (UTC): 2023-01-22 04:35:24 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1617018066012934145
Reply addressees: @whatifalthist
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1617017018376663040
Interesting. Yes. The pattern is consistent.
That pattern consists of the enumeration of a series and an accounting in the form of informal capital.
Kind of fascinating. 😉 https://t.co/sg6awIoKJB
Source date (UTC): 2023-01-21 23:39:43 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616943656887521281
Reply addressees: @JohnGrefe
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616938829818269699
How do you expect to prevent overexpansion when skilled workers in a field are scarce, and it takes years to recover their hiring costs, and often longer before they are net productive?
Of course it’s all relevant. And the FTC can’t stop it. Ending immigration will crush it.
Source date (UTC): 2023-01-21 14:52:44 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616811034253185027
Reply addressees: @LordSothKotL @odannyboy
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616809614850285568
~”By 1200 societies such as England already had all the institutional prerequisites for economic growth emphasized today by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Societies were more incentivized: citizens had more to gain from work and investment than moderns.”~
Source date (UTC): 2023-01-21 14:50:11 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616810395645214723
Make the argument. I stated that unions were not only unnecessary but harmful. I stated that it’s not all engineers being laid off. I know this from previous force reductions. So the ‘tech worker’ claim is misleading. Falsify those claims or give up your virtue signaling.
Source date (UTC): 2023-01-21 04:30:25 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616654424981606400
Reply addressees: @Meatwad650 @odannyboy
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616653679339110400
As someone in the business for forty years, y’aint seen nothing yet. This correction is going to hurt across the board for everyone. And it’s going to last. And unions are what drove industry overseas. Same will happen to software.
Source date (UTC): 2023-01-21 04:05:17 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616648100319207425
Reply addressees: @Meatwad650 @odannyboy
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616639126018695168
So you’re arguing against the percentage of engineers let go or that they are the most employable segment of the economy? Do you know the percentage of devs at each of those companies? Or why unionization would improve their
positions?
Source date (UTC): 2023-01-21 03:27:33 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616638601785131009
Reply addressees: @Meatwad650 @odannyboy
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616637461651914752
FALSE: trump made an investment in the restoration of American production thereby recovering the laboring, working, and middle-class economy. Your claim is that the investment wouldn’t pay off – yet it was doing so before the ‘scam’ of shutting the economy to get him ‘unelected’.
Source date (UTC): 2023-01-20 16:31:43 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616473556954583040
Reply addressees: @WoodrowForCO
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616069644938530817
The math is pretty simple: all advances in energy conversion (consumption) must be offset not by Malthusian reproduction (dysgenia) but by soft eugenic limits on reproduction, thereby continuing natural selection.
4/4
Source date (UTC): 2023-01-20 16:04:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616466822471225344
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616466820898213891
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
So is Carlyleism right? Aesthetically, Culturally, and institutionally he’s correct. But his economics isn’t – he was amidst a storm of change. And we can’t blame him for it, because while he was visionary, he was a bit early, and lacked our present understanding.
3/4
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1616466820898213891
The economic advantage of asymmetry between (a) innovation converting more energy per capita, (b) the profitability of selling that advantage. (c) its capture in Malthusian reproduction (d) reversal or innovation as that consumption (e) the unvirtuous cycle that results.
2/4
Source date (UTC): 2023-01-20 16:04:56 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616466819325497344
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616466817366773762
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
RE: #Carlyle
Not everything is captured in prices, or brushing aside the Malthusian trap, and the momentum created by the sequential revolutions in agriculture to industry that created temporary disruptions before the gains of each revolution were more evenly distributed.
1/4
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1616466817366773762