Curt Doolittle

Theme: Property

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1547708700 Timestamp) —“An unearned equality outcome is theft by another name.”—William L. Benge

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1547906664 Timestamp) —“I have a law degree and i still don’t understand.”–Shane Mark If it wasn’t excruciatingly difficult, someone would have done it before me. Instead, a host of intellectuals during the late 19th through mid 20th tried and failed. But since that time we’ve had computer science (existential) instead of mathematics (ideal), and cognitive science (existential) instead of psychology (pseudoscience), and economics (real) instead of sociology (pseudoscience). There are lots of shoulders of giants to stand upon in the late 20th and early 21st when I’m working. It’s possible to create strictly constructed law on one hand that is testable by computer software, and a chain of dependency that is testable by computer, and to provide the law, prosecutors, lawyers, judges, and the jury with a set of tests for truthful speech – which cannot be performed by computer. Law of tort is quite good really. Legislation and regulation are reasonably good in the anglo (common law) tradition. We just need these tools, universal standing in matters of the commons, thereby ending disintermediation by the state, and providing a via negativa means of competition (court) in addition to the via-positiva means of competition (markets). Now, increase the definition and scope of property (see property-in-toto) to the full suite of things that people act to invest in producing whether by expenditure of forgone opportunity, or expenditure of time, effort, or resources, (including manners, ethics, morals, norms, commons, capital et all) and it is very hard for special interests (and usurpers) to survive. And even more so, nearly impossible to seek rents (more on that another time.)

    • Eradicate false and ir-reciprocal commercial, financial, economic, political, and informational speech in the commons.
    • Restore libel and slander.
    • Prohibit baiting into moral hazard in the law.
    • Replace copyright with creative commons.
    • Eliminate consumer interest (yes, really, and it’s not hard).
    • Privatize (contract out) all bureaucratic functions.
    • Replace private pensions with public (they aren’t possible anyway in current and future economies)…. meaning adopt the singapore model of ‘involuntarily buying insurance to protect your peers from your late age poverty’.

    Much, more detail, but all of it is rather ordinary. I can’t write twenty pages here but just take it for granted that I’ve worked through these ideas in painful detail. We can depoliticize, de-propagandize, eliminate fraud and deceit in every aspect of public life, restore the civic society, halve the time people must work to pay off homes, drastically reduce the cost of education, and dozens of other great improvements and all it will do is end parasitism by the political, bureaucratic, and financial classes.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1547914974 Timestamp) A LAW DEGREE MIGHT HINDER YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF PROPERTARIANISM by Daniel Roland Anderson (law) Depending on one’s academic and personal background, a law degree does significantly more harm than good when it comes to understanding Curt’s work. (Math, Engineering, and Philosophy majors can help. English Lit, Sociology, and Political Science will hinder.) Mostly, a law degree hurts, because one learns to conflate legislation and regulation with actual law—which you won’t learn in law school at all. And the version of Common Law schools teach (pilpul) will definitely do more harm than good because reciprocity has no role in the process, unless learning how to circumvent, distort, denigrate, and subvert reciprocity counts as a “role.” Law schools excel at this. Also, Dunning-Kruger will be an issue for most law school grads. The situation is actually worse than I’m making out, but I’m spending some time with a friend who grew up working in the fields with me, so I’m in a good mood. This kid just turned 32 and intuitively grasps the basics of Curt’s work very, very quickly. He graduated high school with a 1.7 GPA, played a little college football and then never held an 8-5 job—opting instead for work where results determined income 100%. He’s trained people and started businesses and is raising a family. He has a real law degree. 😉

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1547906664 Timestamp) —“I have a law degree and i still don’t understand.”–Shane Mark If it wasn’t excruciatingly difficult, someone would have done it before me. Instead, a host of intellectuals during the late 19th through mid 20th tried and failed. But since that time we’ve had computer science (existential) instead of mathematics (ideal), and cognitive science (existential) instead of psychology (pseudoscience), and economics (real) instead of sociology (pseudoscience). There are lots of shoulders of giants to stand upon in the late 20th and early 21st when I’m working. It’s possible to create strictly constructed law on one hand that is testable by computer software, and a chain of dependency that is testable by computer, and to provide the law, prosecutors, lawyers, judges, and the jury with a set of tests for truthful speech – which cannot be performed by computer. Law of tort is quite good really. Legislation and regulation are reasonably good in the anglo (common law) tradition. We just need these tools, universal standing in matters of the commons, thereby ending disintermediation by the state, and providing a via negativa means of competition (court) in addition to the via-positiva means of competition (markets). Now, increase the definition and scope of property (see property-in-toto) to the full suite of things that people act to invest in producing whether by expenditure of forgone opportunity, or expenditure of time, effort, or resources, (including manners, ethics, morals, norms, commons, capital et all) and it is very hard for special interests (and usurpers) to survive. And even more so, nearly impossible to seek rents (more on that another time.)

    • Eradicate false and ir-reciprocal commercial, financial, economic, political, and informational speech in the commons.
    • Restore libel and slander.
    • Prohibit baiting into moral hazard in the law.
    • Replace copyright with creative commons.
    • Eliminate consumer interest (yes, really, and it’s not hard).
    • Privatize (contract out) all bureaucratic functions.
    • Replace private pensions with public (they aren’t possible anyway in current and future economies)…. meaning adopt the singapore model of ‘involuntarily buying insurance to protect your peers from your late age poverty’.

    Much, more detail, but all of it is rather ordinary. I can’t write twenty pages here but just take it for granted that I’ve worked through these ideas in painful detail. We can depoliticize, de-propagandize, eliminate fraud and deceit in every aspect of public life, restore the civic society, halve the time people must work to pay off homes, drastically reduce the cost of education, and dozens of other great improvements and all it will do is end parasitism by the political, bureaucratic, and financial classes.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1547914974 Timestamp) A LAW DEGREE MIGHT HINDER YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF PROPERTARIANISM by Daniel Roland Anderson (law) Depending on one’s academic and personal background, a law degree does significantly more harm than good when it comes to understanding Curt’s work. (Math, Engineering, and Philosophy majors can help. English Lit, Sociology, and Political Science will hinder.) Mostly, a law degree hurts, because one learns to conflate legislation and regulation with actual law—which you won’t learn in law school at all. And the version of Common Law schools teach (pilpul) will definitely do more harm than good because reciprocity has no role in the process, unless learning how to circumvent, distort, denigrate, and subvert reciprocity counts as a “role.” Law schools excel at this. Also, Dunning-Kruger will be an issue for most law school grads. The situation is actually worse than I’m making out, but I’m spending some time with a friend who grew up working in the fields with me, so I’m in a good mood. This kid just turned 32 and intuitively grasps the basics of Curt’s work very, very quickly. He graduated high school with a 1.7 GPA, played a little college football and then never held an 8-5 job—opting instead for work where results determined income 100%. He’s trained people and started businesses and is raising a family. He has a real law degree. 😉

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1548342580 Timestamp) PROPERTARIAN PARSIMONY GIVEN THE FOLLOWING Whereas life defends investment of

    1. Time,
    2. Effort,
    3. Resources,
    4. Forgone opportunity

    Where defended investments consist of:

    1. Self-Property – Body, Time, Actions, Memory, Concepts, Status, etc.
    2. Personal Property – Houses, Cars, “Things”, etc.
    3. Kinship Property – Mates, Children, Family, Friends, etc.
    4. Cooperative Property – Organizational and Knowledge ties.
    5. Shareholder Property – Recorded and Quantified shares. Citizenship.
    6. Common Property – Territorial and capital interests, Artificial Property.
    7. Informal Institutional Property – Manners, Ethics, Morals, Myths, Rituals.
    8. Formal Institutional Property – Religion, Government, Laws.

    Where reciprocity consists of:

    1. Productive
    2. Fully informed
    3. Warrantied
    4. Voluntary transfer
    5. Free negative externality.

    Where ir-reciprocity in action consists of: Action: 1. Murder 2. Harm

    3. Theft

    1. Fraud (in all forms)
    2. Free Riding (in all forms: Socialization of losses, Privatization of commons)
    3. Blackmail
    4. Rent Seeking.

    9. Conspiracy

    1. Propagandizing (Poisoning the well)

    11. Conversion (Poisoning the well)

    1. Immigration,
    2. Conquest
    3. Genocide

    And where ir-reciprocity in speech consists in: Speech 1. Intent to lie. 2. Intent to deceive. 3. Failure of due diligence against lying 4. Carrier of lies. 5. Carrier of tradition and culture of lies. 6. A genetic predisposition to lie. And Where truthful speech consists of:

    1. categorically consistent (identity)
    2. internally consistent (logic)
    3. externally correspondent (empirical)
    4. operationally consistent (existentially possible)
    5. rationally consistent (rational choice)
    6. reciprocally consistent (reciprocal rational choice)
    7. consistent within scope, limits, and fully accounting (complete)
    8. consistent across all those seven dimensions (coherent)
      And where:

    And where both Actions and Speech are limited by:

    1. limited to actions for which restitution(restoration) is possible.
    2. warrantied by sufficient resources to perform restitution.
    3. The function of the state is largely to serve as insurer of last resort against actions for which restitution is impossible, improbable, or beyond the means of the community to organize.

    And Where the function of the state is: And Where the function of the law is:

    1. The function of common natural law is to resolve differences.
    2. The function of legislation is to provide contracts for production of commons.
    3. The function of regulation is to administer operationalization of legislation, and the common law.

    And Where the difficulty in the present:

    1. No means of testing the legislation prior to its enactment.
    2. No means of returning legislation to the legislature.
    3. No means of approving regulation as expansion of legislation.
    4. No means of structurally limiting law, legislation, and regulation, to strict construction from reciprocity and therefore tests of computability (operational possibility).

    In other words, there are limits to what private insurers can do, and the case study is germany, which makes most use of insurance of any people. Cheers.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1548342580 Timestamp) PROPERTARIAN PARSIMONY GIVEN THE FOLLOWING Whereas life defends investment of

    1. Time,
    2. Effort,
    3. Resources,
    4. Forgone opportunity

    Where defended investments consist of:

    1. Self-Property – Body, Time, Actions, Memory, Concepts, Status, etc.
    2. Personal Property – Houses, Cars, “Things”, etc.
    3. Kinship Property – Mates, Children, Family, Friends, etc.
    4. Cooperative Property – Organizational and Knowledge ties.
    5. Shareholder Property – Recorded and Quantified shares. Citizenship.
    6. Common Property – Territorial and capital interests, Artificial Property.
    7. Informal Institutional Property – Manners, Ethics, Morals, Myths, Rituals.
    8. Formal Institutional Property – Religion, Government, Laws.

    Where reciprocity consists of:

    1. Productive
    2. Fully informed
    3. Warrantied
    4. Voluntary transfer
    5. Free negative externality.

    Where ir-reciprocity in action consists of: Action: 1. Murder 2. Harm

    3. Theft

    1. Fraud (in all forms)
    2. Free Riding (in all forms: Socialization of losses, Privatization of commons)
    3. Blackmail
    4. Rent Seeking.

    9. Conspiracy

    1. Propagandizing (Poisoning the well)

    11. Conversion (Poisoning the well)

    1. Immigration,
    2. Conquest
    3. Genocide

    And where ir-reciprocity in speech consists in: Speech 1. Intent to lie. 2. Intent to deceive. 3. Failure of due diligence against lying 4. Carrier of lies. 5. Carrier of tradition and culture of lies. 6. A genetic predisposition to lie. And Where truthful speech consists of:

    1. categorically consistent (identity)
    2. internally consistent (logic)
    3. externally correspondent (empirical)
    4. operationally consistent (existentially possible)
    5. rationally consistent (rational choice)
    6. reciprocally consistent (reciprocal rational choice)
    7. consistent within scope, limits, and fully accounting (complete)
    8. consistent across all those seven dimensions (coherent)
      And where:

    And where both Actions and Speech are limited by:

    1. limited to actions for which restitution(restoration) is possible.
    2. warrantied by sufficient resources to perform restitution.
    3. The function of the state is largely to serve as insurer of last resort against actions for which restitution is impossible, improbable, or beyond the means of the community to organize.

    And Where the function of the state is: And Where the function of the law is:

    1. The function of common natural law is to resolve differences.
    2. The function of legislation is to provide contracts for production of commons.
    3. The function of regulation is to administer operationalization of legislation, and the common law.

    And Where the difficulty in the present:

    1. No means of testing the legislation prior to its enactment.
    2. No means of returning legislation to the legislature.
    3. No means of approving regulation as expansion of legislation.
    4. No means of structurally limiting law, legislation, and regulation, to strict construction from reciprocity and therefore tests of computability (operational possibility).

    In other words, there are limits to what private insurers can do, and the case study is germany, which makes most use of insurance of any people. Cheers.

  • Curt Doolittle shared a link.

    (FB 1548444232 Timestamp) PART 7 !!!!! Propertarian E-book Published on Jan 25, 2019

    • A LIST OF HANS HERMANN HOPPE’S ERRORS
    • LIBERTARIANS ARE JUST COMMON PROPERTY MARXISTS
    • THE ONLY MEANS OF ELIMINATING THE STATE AND CONSTRUCTING LIBERTY

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1548545500 Timestamp) THE SELF-REGULATION OF THE ARTS –Art is a way of making an idea real (open to experience). Art is the demonstrated property of an artist. Art is governed by established rules and principles and demonstrates an observance of limits on what is permitted or appropriate.”—Spencer Young This is .. really good structure. Rarely good structure. Pls let me suggest a tweak to your thought process a bit, and to riff off this opportunity to educate others: –“…governed by…”— This phrase is an analogy, not a description. Is art ‘governed?’. No. The process of regulation is much more elegant than that.

    • There exist economic costs of the production of different art forms.
    • There exist civilizations capable of paying the costs of different art forms (or not).
    • There exist technologies within each craft as well as the craft of aesthetics.
    • There exists symbolic content and aesthetic composition that ‘brands’ periods (states of development).
    • There exists mastery of the craft, the aesthetics, and the informational(symbolic) content.
    • There exists a tradition in all of the above (market).
    • There exists imitation that causes that tradition(market).
    • There are canons (reference works) that reinforce imitation and tradition (standards of weights and measures);
    • There is a market for imitation, canons, and the art itself.

    This is one of those deceptively hard questions of art theory. As far as I know, art is an ancient, even eternal, self-regulating market that ‘demonstrates demand for art works within both current and traditional limits of craftsmanship, aesthetics, meaning, context of display, and morals/ethics/manners (appropriateness).” There is plenty of ‘market manipulation’ in the arts, and it has been so forever. Just like every other market. However, professionals are rarely fooled. And tradition of the heroic value of arts continues unabated. (thanks for letting me riff with this)

  • Curt Doolittle shared a link.

    (FB 1548444232 Timestamp) PART 7 !!!!! Propertarian E-book Published on Jan 25, 2019

    • A LIST OF HANS HERMANN HOPPE’S ERRORS
    • LIBERTARIANS ARE JUST COMMON PROPERTY MARXISTS
    • THE ONLY MEANS OF ELIMINATING THE STATE AND CONSTRUCTING LIBERTY