Theme: Property

  • Were There White Slaves In The Us?

    Indentured servitude is/was a contractual form of voluntary slavery, with exit , and indentured servants were a substantial part of the early colonies.

    The sex-slave trade in white women was common, and was only finally outlawed in 1910.

    THE ECONOMY SHIFTS, THE CONDITIONS REMAIN
    All of these forms of slavery were extant from the earliest records in almost every agrarian civilization.

    Take your pick:

    SERIES: Undomesticated Human Animal > Chattel Slavery(Property) > Slavery(servitude) > Serfdom (partial independence) > Economic Slavery(Wage Labor) > Tax Slavery (Citizen)> Jurisdictional Slavery(Government) > “Cult” slavery(Religion).

    Serfdom = Inability to exit taxation. Slavery=inability to exit, period.

    HIGH MINDEDNESS
    We take credit for high mindedness, but the truth of the matter is, that slavery occurs out of economic necessity, and the reason it disappeared was the black plague, the early modern agrarian revolution, the early industrial revolution, and late industrial revolutions, that made it economically preferential to have employees and customers rather than slaves.

    Rule of historical analysis: never assume people do things out of good nature. They do things because it’s feasible and they want to obtain virtue signals as means of displaying conspicuous consumption.

    The human intuitionistic and biological accounting system is just status signals.

    (Read Veblen)

    https://www.quora.com/Were-there-white-slaves-in-the-US

  • Illegal, Not Illegal, And Legal.

    (Friend reminds me this is beneath my purview. This post is not about weed, but about markets and the scope of permissible behavior under law.) A Post on ‘weed’ reminded me to make an important point: We do not choose between ILLEGAL, and LEGAL … … but between: ILLEGAL, NOT-ILLEGAL, and LEGAL: SEQUENCE: 0 – Bearable but not Usable ( Grandfathered ) 1 – Usable but not producible ( Personal ) 2 – Producible but not exchangeable, (Private) 3 – Exchangeable but not commercial, (Hobby Market) 4 – Commercial but not industrial, (Craft Market) 5 – Industrial but regulated, (Commercial Market) 6 – Industrial but unregulated (Almost Never). IMO ‘weed’ should have been made not-illegal in Private and Commons but not in Markets. In other words, producible, exchangeable, but not marketable. Commercialization was a mistake. And it was (measurably) unnecessary.
  • Illegal, Not Illegal, And Legal.

    (Friend reminds me this is beneath my purview. This post is not about weed, but about markets and the scope of permissible behavior under law.) A Post on ‘weed’ reminded me to make an important point: We do not choose between ILLEGAL, and LEGAL … … but between: ILLEGAL, NOT-ILLEGAL, and LEGAL: SEQUENCE: 0 – Bearable but not Usable ( Grandfathered ) 1 – Usable but not producible ( Personal ) 2 – Producible but not exchangeable, (Private) 3 – Exchangeable but not commercial, (Hobby Market) 4 – Commercial but not industrial, (Craft Market) 5 – Industrial but regulated, (Commercial Market) 6 – Industrial but unregulated (Almost Never). IMO ‘weed’ should have been made not-illegal in Private and Commons but not in Markets. In other words, producible, exchangeable, but not marketable. Commercialization was a mistake. And it was (measurably) unnecessary.
  • ILLEGAL, NOT ILLEGAL, AND LEGAL. (Friend reminds me this is beneath my purview.

    ILLEGAL, NOT ILLEGAL, AND LEGAL.

    (Friend reminds me this is beneath my purview. This post is not about weed, but about markets and the scope of permissible behavior under law.)

    A Post on ‘weed’ reminded me to make an important point:

    We do not choose between ILLEGAL, and LEGAL …

    … but between:

    ILLEGAL, NOT-ILLEGAL, and LEGAL:

    SEQUENCE:

    0 – Bearable but not Usable ( Grandfathered )

    1 – Usable but not producible ( Personal )

    2 – Producible but not exchangeable, (Private)

    3 – Exchangeable but not commercial, (Hobby Market)

    4 – Commercial but not industrial, (Craft Market)

    5 – Industrial but regulated, (Commercial Market)

    6 – Industrial but unregulated (Almost Never).

    IMO ‘weed’ should have been made not-illegal in Private and Commons but not in Markets. In other words, producible, exchangeable, but not marketable. Commercialization was a mistake. And it was (measurably) unnecessary.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-02 16:33:00 UTC

  • Ostrom’s Argument Is ‘Misrepresented’ Like Everything On The Left.

    (important)(common property)(property rights) (Thank you for asking me to answer this rather … challenging question.) —-”**How do libertarians address the tragedy of the commons?”—** Ostrom’s argument is identical to the libertarian argument, although far more articulate, supported by exhausted research, and articulated in a FORMAL LOGICAL GRAMMAR. **Ostrom’s argument**, is that: 1 – Common property organizations, meaning ‘**private corporations**’ will form as a means of managing scarce assets, with or without state interference, and with or without issuance of shares of title. 2 – **States create the tragedy of the commons** when the INTERFERE with the development of those private corporations, by violating the property rights of the participants in the ‘natural corporation’ that manages the asset. 3 – If states (groups, polities, governments, judiciaries) merely **INSURE all forms of property** (exclusivity of benefit, and exclusivity of management), people will, out of natural self interest, maintain any asset of any kind. In other words, Ostrom explained the evolution of the corporation – before we created the corporation in order to obtain outside investment, and therefore limited liability, OSTROM’S RULES (REORDERED FOR CLARITY) FOLLOWED BY RESTATEMENT OF EACH, IN OPERATIONAL TERMS 2B – Appropriation and provision: The benefits obtained by users from a common-pool resource (CPR), as determined by appropriation rules, are proportional to the amount of inputs required in the form of labor, material, or money, as determined by provision rules. * ****[ ‘People only get out of the corporation what they put in to the corporation, in the form of labor and assets.’].*** 1A – User boundaries: Boundaries between legitimate users and nonusers must be clearly defined. ** *****[‘Those who have contributed labor and assets into the corporation in exchange for returns on those labor and assets, shall exclusively benefit from the common pool resource.’]*** 1B – Resource boundaries: Clear boundaries are present that define a resource system and separate it from the larger biophysical environment. ***[‘The assets of the corporation shall not impose costs by externality.’]*** 2A – Congruence with local conditions: Appropriation and provision rules are congruent with local social and environmental conditions. ***[‘Broader communities insure (defend) Personal, familial, Private Corporate, Public Corporate, and Public Assets, from violation, and the corporation must be insured by those same institutions.’]**** * 3 – Collective-choice arrangements: Most individuals affected by the operational rules can participate in modifying the operational rules. ***[‘Only shareholders who have contributed labor and assets shall participate in the management of the assets of the corporation.’]*** 4A – Monitoring users: Monitors who are accountable to the users monitor the appropriation and provision levels of the users. 4B – Monitoring the resource: Monitors who are accountable to the users monitor the condition of the resource. ***[‘Contributors to the corporation monitor one another just like we monitor one another in all aspects of personal, familial, private corporate, public corporate, and public life’]*** 5 – Graduated sanctions: Appropriators who violate operational rules are likely to be assessed graduated sanctions (depending on the seriousness and the context of the offense) by other appropriators, by officials accountable to the appropriators, or by both. ***[‘Corporations produce their own internal laws for violations of corporate assets’]*** 6 – Conflict-resolution mechanisms: Appropriators and their officials have rapid access to low-cost local arenas to resolve conflicts among appropriators or between appropriators and officials. 7 – Minimal recognition of rights to organize: The rights of appropriators to devise their own institutions are not challenged by external governmental authorities. ***[‘Natural private corporations must exist, and will exist, but like all forms of property require defense, even if that defense includes defense from the interfering state.’]*** 8 – Nested enterprises: Appropriation, provision, monitoring, enforcement, conflict resolution, and governance activities are organized in multiple layers of nested enterprises. ***[Humans must organize defense of the various forms of property in order to gain the benefits, of decreased opportunity cost, from increased numbers and increased density, and the benefits of numbers, and density, and velocity (everything becomes cheaper) are directly proportional to the degree of suppression of parasitism upon property, where property consists of material physical and asset investment in the production of multipliers, and therefore returns.]*** Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine
  • Ostrom’s Argument Is ‘Misrepresented’ Like Everything On The Left.

    (important)(common property)(property rights) (Thank you for asking me to answer this rather … challenging question.) —-”**How do libertarians address the tragedy of the commons?”—** Ostrom’s argument is identical to the libertarian argument, although far more articulate, supported by exhausted research, and articulated in a FORMAL LOGICAL GRAMMAR. **Ostrom’s argument**, is that: 1 – Common property organizations, meaning ‘**private corporations**’ will form as a means of managing scarce assets, with or without state interference, and with or without issuance of shares of title. 2 – **States create the tragedy of the commons** when the INTERFERE with the development of those private corporations, by violating the property rights of the participants in the ‘natural corporation’ that manages the asset. 3 – If states (groups, polities, governments, judiciaries) merely **INSURE all forms of property** (exclusivity of benefit, and exclusivity of management), people will, out of natural self interest, maintain any asset of any kind. In other words, Ostrom explained the evolution of the corporation – before we created the corporation in order to obtain outside investment, and therefore limited liability, OSTROM’S RULES (REORDERED FOR CLARITY) FOLLOWED BY RESTATEMENT OF EACH, IN OPERATIONAL TERMS 2B – Appropriation and provision: The benefits obtained by users from a common-pool resource (CPR), as determined by appropriation rules, are proportional to the amount of inputs required in the form of labor, material, or money, as determined by provision rules. * ****[ ‘People only get out of the corporation what they put in to the corporation, in the form of labor and assets.’].*** 1A – User boundaries: Boundaries between legitimate users and nonusers must be clearly defined. ** *****[‘Those who have contributed labor and assets into the corporation in exchange for returns on those labor and assets, shall exclusively benefit from the common pool resource.’]*** 1B – Resource boundaries: Clear boundaries are present that define a resource system and separate it from the larger biophysical environment. ***[‘The assets of the corporation shall not impose costs by externality.’]*** 2A – Congruence with local conditions: Appropriation and provision rules are congruent with local social and environmental conditions. ***[‘Broader communities insure (defend) Personal, familial, Private Corporate, Public Corporate, and Public Assets, from violation, and the corporation must be insured by those same institutions.’]**** * 3 – Collective-choice arrangements: Most individuals affected by the operational rules can participate in modifying the operational rules. ***[‘Only shareholders who have contributed labor and assets shall participate in the management of the assets of the corporation.’]*** 4A – Monitoring users: Monitors who are accountable to the users monitor the appropriation and provision levels of the users. 4B – Monitoring the resource: Monitors who are accountable to the users monitor the condition of the resource. ***[‘Contributors to the corporation monitor one another just like we monitor one another in all aspects of personal, familial, private corporate, public corporate, and public life’]*** 5 – Graduated sanctions: Appropriators who violate operational rules are likely to be assessed graduated sanctions (depending on the seriousness and the context of the offense) by other appropriators, by officials accountable to the appropriators, or by both. ***[‘Corporations produce their own internal laws for violations of corporate assets’]*** 6 – Conflict-resolution mechanisms: Appropriators and their officials have rapid access to low-cost local arenas to resolve conflicts among appropriators or between appropriators and officials. 7 – Minimal recognition of rights to organize: The rights of appropriators to devise their own institutions are not challenged by external governmental authorities. ***[‘Natural private corporations must exist, and will exist, but like all forms of property require defense, even if that defense includes defense from the interfering state.’]*** 8 – Nested enterprises: Appropriation, provision, monitoring, enforcement, conflict resolution, and governance activities are organized in multiple layers of nested enterprises. ***[Humans must organize defense of the various forms of property in order to gain the benefits, of decreased opportunity cost, from increased numbers and increased density, and the benefits of numbers, and density, and velocity (everything becomes cheaper) are directly proportional to the degree of suppression of parasitism upon property, where property consists of material physical and asset investment in the production of multipliers, and therefore returns.]*** Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine
  • OSTROM’S ARGUMENT IS ‘MISREPRESENTED’ LIKE EVERYTHING ON THE LEFT. (important)(c

    OSTROM’S ARGUMENT IS ‘MISREPRESENTED’ LIKE EVERYTHING ON THE LEFT.

    (important)(common property)(property rights)

    (Thank you for asking me to answer this rather … challenging question.)

    —-”**How do libertarians address the tragedy of the commons?”—**

    Ostrom’s argument is identical to the libertarian argument, although far more articulate, supported by exhausted research, and articulated in a FORMAL LOGICAL GRAMMAR.

    **Ostrom’s argument**, is that:

    1 – Common property organizations, meaning ‘**private corporations**’ will form as a means of managing scarce assets, with or without state interference, and with or without issuance of shares of title.

    2 – **States create the tragedy of the commons** when the INTERFERE with the development of those private corporations, by violating the property rights of the participants in the ‘natural corporation’ that manages the asset.

    3 – If states (groups, polities, governments, judiciaries) merely **INSURE all forms of property** (exclusivity of benefit, and exclusivity of management), people will, out of natural self interest, maintain any asset of any kind.

    In other words, Ostrom explained the evolution of the corporation – before we created the corporation in order to obtain outside investment, and therefore limited liability,

    OSTROM’S RULES (REORDERED FOR CLARITY) FOLLOWED BY RESTATEMENT OF EACH, IN OPERATIONAL TERMS

    2B – Appropriation and provision: The benefits obtained by users from a common-pool resource (CPR), as determined by appropriation rules, are proportional to the amount of inputs required in the form of labor, material, or money, as determined by provision rules. *

    ****[ ‘People only get out of the corporation what they put in to the corporation, in the form of labor and assets.’].***

    1A – User boundaries: Boundaries between legitimate users and nonusers must be clearly defined.

    ** *****[‘Those who have contributed labor and assets into the corporation in exchange for returns on those labor and assets, shall exclusively benefit from the common pool resource.’]***

    1B – Resource boundaries: Clear boundaries are present that define a resource system and separate it from the larger biophysical environment.

    ***[‘The assets of the corporation shall not impose costs by externality.’]***

    2A – Congruence with local conditions: Appropriation and provision rules are congruent with local social and environmental conditions.

    ***[‘Broader communities insure (defend) Personal, familial, Private Corporate, Public Corporate, and Public Assets, from violation, and the corporation must be insured by those same institutions.’]****

    *

    3 – Collective-choice arrangements: Most individuals affected by the operational rules can participate in modifying the operational rules.

    ***[‘Only shareholders who have contributed labor and assets shall participate in the management of the assets of the corporation.’]***

    4A – Monitoring users: Monitors who are accountable to the users monitor the appropriation and provision levels of the users.

    4B – Monitoring the resource: Monitors who are accountable to the users monitor the condition of the resource.

    ***[‘Contributors to the corporation monitor one another just like we monitor one another in all aspects of personal, familial, private corporate, public corporate, and public life’]***

    5 – Graduated sanctions: Appropriators who violate operational rules are likely to be assessed graduated sanctions (depending on the seriousness and the context of the offense) by other appropriators, by officials accountable to the appropriators, or by both.

    ***[‘Corporations produce their own internal laws for violations of corporate assets’]***

    6 – Conflict-resolution mechanisms: Appropriators and their officials have rapid access to low-cost local arenas to resolve conflicts among appropriators or between appropriators and officials.

    7 – Minimal recognition of rights to organize: The rights of appropriators to devise their own institutions are not challenged by external governmental authorities.

    ***[‘Natural private corporations must exist, and will exist, but like all forms of property require defense, even if that defense includes defense from the interfering state.’]***

    8 – Nested enterprises: Appropriation, provision, monitoring, enforcement, conflict resolution, and governance activities are organized in multiple layers of nested enterprises.

    ***[Humans must organize defense of the various forms of property in order to gain the benefits, of decreased opportunity cost, from increased numbers and increased density, and the benefits of numbers, and density, and velocity (everything becomes cheaper) are directly proportional to the degree of suppression of parasitism upon property, where property consists of material physical and asset investment in the production of multipliers, and therefore returns.]***

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-01 21:49:00 UTC

  • My answer to What’s the difference between communism and libertarianism?

    My answer to What’s the difference between communism and libertarianism? https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-difference-between-communism-and-libertarianism/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=76935ebc


    Source date (UTC): 2017-12-29 16:12:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/946775992080707584

  • “WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COMMUNISM AND LIBERTARIANISM?”— In **COMMUNISM

    —“WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COMMUNISM AND LIBERTARIANISM?”— In **COMMUNISM** private property is abolished in order to create exclusively *common* property. *(Rule By Discretion)* In **LIBERTARIANISM**, common property is abolished in order to create exclusively *private* property. *(Anarchy)* In **CLASSICAL LIBERALISM** (Rule of Law), the houses of government constitute a *market* for the voluntary production of commons between the people who pay for them with sacrifice of their private property. *(Rule of Law)*
  • “WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COMMUNISM AND LIBERTARIANISM?”— In **COMMUNISM

    —“WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COMMUNISM AND LIBERTARIANISM?”— In **COMMUNISM** private property is abolished in order to create exclusively *common* property. *(Rule By Discretion)* In **LIBERTARIANISM**, common property is abolished in order to create exclusively *private* property. *(Anarchy)* In **CLASSICAL LIBERALISM** (Rule of Law), the houses of government constitute a *market* for the voluntary production of commons between the people who pay for them with sacrifice of their private property. *(Rule of Law)*