Theme: Property

  • MIXED AND UNMIXED ECONOMIES? 0) lets look at these terms: COMMUNISM: unorganized

    MIXED AND UNMIXED ECONOMIES?

    0) lets look at these terms:

    COMMUNISM: unorganized equalitarian production of private and commons. Collective ownership of the means of production.

    (PARASITISM UPON THE INDIVIDUAL)

    SOCIALISM: state (involuntary) organization of production. State ownerhship of the means of production. state ownership of the proceeds of production. state distribution of the proceeds of production to common or private ends.

    (INVOLUNTARY COMMONS)

    SOCIAL DEMOCRACY: state organization of some part of production. State ownership of the MEANS of production, state ownership of the PROCEEDS of production. Individual retains COMMISSION on his production for his private consumption, the remainder is held by the state for the production of commons.

    (COMPETITION FOR PRIVATE AND COMMONS)

    CLASSICAL LIBERALISM: individual ownership of the means of production, individual ownership of the proceeds of production. The voluntary organization of production. individuals contribute to the production of commons by majority assent.

    (VOLUNTARY COMMONS)

    CAPITALISM (market anarchism). Individual ownership of the means of production, individual ownership of the proceeds of production, the voluntary organization of production, and the private construction of common goods.

    (PARASITISM UPON THE COMMONS)

    1) EXTREMES FAIL

    Neither socialism nor capitalism is possible. Hence neither exists.

    2) MONOPOLIES FAIL:

    Instead we develop mixed economies.

    Social democracy (mixed economies) are the constant throughout history. At present the mainstream seeks to identify the maximum taxation possible without disincentivizing production. This appears to be dependent upon the homogeneity of the population.

    3) MIXED WORK, BUT MORE MIXING IS BETTER

    We appear to need a different economic model for each CLASS.

    … Lets look at the hierarchy of labor:

    – barbarian (outside the system – person is candidate or enemy)

    – prisoner (owner bears risk but person is disposable)

    – slave/soldiery (owner bears risk – person is tradable/releasable)

    – serf (split cost of risk) (supported by own production)

    – employee (full cost of risk) (supported by production returns)

    – professional (burgher) (supported by trade returns)

    – capitalist (landowner) (supported by management returns)

    – statist (aristocracy) (supported by proceeds of taxation)

    – warriors (aristocracy) (supported by proceeds of conquest)

    So we do not have ENOUGH of a mixed economy.

    We have no slavery, too small a military, no regiments, too small a disaster releif organization, no commons- maintenance organizations, too few syndicates and unions, and no monasteries or nunneries, and the academy functions as the only monastery. Yet we have a bloated financial sector that is clearly parasitic.

    Why? Because we allowed collective bargaining, and parasitic private and public contracts to award pensions we could not afford at our rates of inflation.

    We have created the worst possible mix of large homes and small expensive urban apartments, rather than large family apartments in large numbers in urban areas.

    We have created an empire with constant political conflict in order to gain mobility, rather than a collection of small homogenous states with constant political satisfaction of local demands, at the expense of mobility. However, that mobility is the reason for the decline of social order and the fmaily and care for the commons, and our culture itself.

    Economists are even WORSE idiots than theologians.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev,Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-03 13:03:00 UTC

  • 1) Insurers, not government provide superior regulation because insurers are pai

    1) Insurers, not government provide superior regulation because insurers are paid directly to understand what it is that they insure. Government acts as an insurer of last resort – governing the insurers, not the innovators. It’s the middleman-insurer that specializes in the technology, whereas the government merely specializes in fraud and crime prevention by regulating the insurer.

    2) The market is far better than our imaginations at both discoveries, finding opportunities to make use of them, finding means of immorally benefitting from them, and finding means of regulating them. As long as the market, the innovator, the insurer, and the government all do their jobs, we do not need to envision so much as react.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-02 11:46:00 UTC

  • “The necessary antidote to undue praise is to pick on losers. It may seem unspor

    —“The necessary antidote to undue praise is to pick on losers. It may seem unsporting, but heaping praise on the unworthy is also theft from the worthy. Medicine doesn’t always taste good but it’s usually better than the ailment. The fault lies with liars who make it necessary to set the record straight, not with those who do.”—-Ely Harman


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-28 21:47:00 UTC

  • Open Borders Produce Forceful Redistribution.

    —“Property norms define superior and inferior claims. The current condition of the “unused” land is subsidized at gun point by victims of tax theft. Those victims therefore have the best objective link to its use. An open border policy is therefore the forceful redistribution of resources from those with superior property claims to those with inferior property claims.”—Jared Howe
  • Open Borders Produce Forceful Redistribution.

    —“Property norms define superior and inferior claims. The current condition of the “unused” land is subsidized at gun point by victims of tax theft. Those victims therefore have the best objective link to its use. An open border policy is therefore the forceful redistribution of resources from those with superior property claims to those with inferior property claims.”—Jared Howe
  • “Property norms are about superior claims. The current condition of the “unused”

    —“Property norms are about superior claims. The current condition of the “unused” land is subsidized at gun point by victims of tax theft. Those victims therefore have the best objective link to its use. An open border policy is therefore the forceful redistribution of resources from those with superior property claims to those with inferior property claims.”—Jared Howe


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-19 10:11:00 UTC

  • Um. I would say this analysis is exceptionally well done, other than i mean ‘cal

    Um. I would say this analysis is exceptionally well done, other than i mean ‘caloric’ in the broader sense of literally ‘anything’ that changes the state of the individual’s possessions, property, assets, capital (property in toto), either as a premium or discount, gain or loss.

    So the first sentence I’d cut. Otherwise ‘this is how it is done’.

    by James Augustus Berens

    —“[CUT:] Caloric shortages shouldn’t be given too much weight as a selection pressure for cooperative human groups.[/CUT]

    Cooperation arose from intergroup warfare: cooperative groups out-compete less-cooperative groups, increasing the frequency of genes, norms and institutions that encourage and maintain cooperation.

    However, this brings into question free-ridership. An individual can benefit by defecting from his groups expensive war efforts. Groups with high-proportions of free-riders, those unwilling or unable to fight, were out-completed by more cooperative and able groups. Hence, altruistic punishment becomes adaptive insofar as it allows groups to discourage defection, desertion & free-ridership. Punishment occurs even in small-scale societies [1]. And there are some suggestions that cooperation, sharing, raiding and defense, punishing free-riding or other violations of social norms are a costly signals of an individuals fitness [2].

    Again, caloric-shortages likely had a negligible impact–as an incentive for cooperation–by the time we were anatomically modern humans. Cooperation evolved via group-selection; and warfare was the major selection-pressure. Along with cooperation, we have a a co-evolution of prosecution and punishment. Which brings us to the crux of the issue: scale. (I will leave the treatment of asymmetric warfare for a later date)

    As cooperation increases, so to does complexity, and so to the cost we must pay to IDENTIFY the more abstract forms of human parasitism (because they simply no longer occur on a human scale). So rather than a shift from caloric shortage to caloric surplus as the impetus for the formal suppression of parasitism (as shown above we have been prosecuting/punishing since we’ve been cooperating), it is the increased scale (complexity) of the post-industrial ‘information’ age that necessitates extending the domain of law to be inclusive of the production of information–the latest, and most complex human endeavor.

    The problem and solution are the same: free-riding and suppression, respectively. What’s novel is that because of cooperation, we’ve surpassed human scale, and so to has parasitism. Before propertarianism, we had no means of resisting, identifying and prosecuting impositions of costs on the informational commons.

    We do now.

    Postscript (bonus for the autistes): The Evolution of the Scope of Natural Law

    |—–cooperation—->

    |—–complexity—–>

    …………..Law

    |—(0)(1)(2)(3)(4)(5)->

    0. Domestication of alphas (in-group elimination of asymmetric violence)

    1. Reproduction

    2. Inter-subjectively verifiable property.

    3. Normative and Institutional Commons.

    4. Capital & Credit

    5. Information

    [1] Punishment sustains large-scale cooperation in prestate warfare

    http://m.pnas.org/content/108/28/11375.short

    [2] Costly Signaling and Cooperation

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/…/pii/S0022519301924063

    “— James Augustus Berens


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-12 17:05:00 UTC

  • Cooperation boils down to property transfer? Via negativa. It’s more that the vi

    Cooperation boils down to property transfer?

    Via negativa.

    It’s more that the violations of cooperation boil down to involuntary transfer of property.

    We cannot imagine all the ways we can cooperate.

    We can however, catalog all the ways we had found to irritate. 😉

    By avoiding the false and bad and ugly we leave room for all varieties of true, good, and beautiful

    We have been programming ourselves forever for finding cooperation and rallying cooperation (via positiva). The problem of calorie shortage reinforces the value of that strategy.

    But we are not living in an era of calorie shortage where we must IDENTIFY opportunities, and instead, in an era where we CHOOSE FROM plentiful opportunities by eliminating error, bias, wishful thinking, and deceit.

    I think this change from rallying to criticism is very important. A very important change in thought.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-12 01:54:00 UTC

  • A Short Course In Incremental Suppression

    THE MEANING OF INCREMENTAL SUPPRESSION (important concept)(propertarianism core) (worth repeating often) Causal Chain: Sovereignty > Natural Law > Incremental Suppression > Markets

    WHAT IS INCREMENTAL SUPPRESSION? organic common law as a means of incrementally suppressing free riding   11329943_844618748949499_3787539329878715636_n.jpg 1) Humans acquire at cost and defend what they have acquired at cost. 2) cooperation is disproportionately more productive than predation. 3) cooperation is only preferable to predation in the total absence of parasitism. Or, what we call free-riding. 4) Because of the disproportionate value of cooperation, Humans retaliate against free riding even if at high cost ( altruistic punishment). They protect the institution by severe policing of cheaters. 5) rules against free riding, either normative or codified in law, prohibit parasitism (free riding). 6) prohibitions that are habituated in norms or codified in law provide a means of decision making in matters of conflict. 7) prohibitions against parasitism can be positively expressed as contractual “rights”. 8) community member (shareholders in the local market) insure one another by suppressing retaliation against settlements of grievances according to norms and laws. 9) The common, organic law allows for the least time lapse between an innovation in the means of parasitism and the construction of a prohibition against this new means of parasitism expressed as new law. As such all laws are discovered. (very important) 10) high trust societies use common law to incrementally suppress all available means of free riding, leaving productive participation in the market as the only viable means of survival. 11) as a consequence, the reproduction of the lower classes is suppressed and the distribution of talents increases along with the innovations in technology. (market eugenics). Thus obviating the need for tyranny and redistribution. Aristocracy, Egalitarianism, morality, Nomocracy, meritocracy, Science, and eugenic evolution are mutually dependent. The chart below shows the incremental suppression of parasitism stating from the suppression of violence through fraud, through conspiracy, through immigration, through conquest. Only the west succeeded in developing truth. And without it we cannot have the jury. And without the jury no judge or common law. Truth matters above all else. Pseudoscience is just babylonian monotheistic mysticism in new clothes. This emperor is naked also. Truth is enough to rescue the west.
  • A Short Course In Incremental Suppression

    THE MEANING OF INCREMENTAL SUPPRESSION (important concept)(propertarianism core) (worth repeating often) Causal Chain: Sovereignty > Natural Law > Incremental Suppression > Markets

    WHAT IS INCREMENTAL SUPPRESSION? organic common law as a means of incrementally suppressing free riding   11329943_844618748949499_3787539329878715636_n.jpg 1) Humans acquire at cost and defend what they have acquired at cost. 2) cooperation is disproportionately more productive than predation. 3) cooperation is only preferable to predation in the total absence of parasitism. Or, what we call free-riding. 4) Because of the disproportionate value of cooperation, Humans retaliate against free riding even if at high cost ( altruistic punishment). They protect the institution by severe policing of cheaters. 5) rules against free riding, either normative or codified in law, prohibit parasitism (free riding). 6) prohibitions that are habituated in norms or codified in law provide a means of decision making in matters of conflict. 7) prohibitions against parasitism can be positively expressed as contractual “rights”. 8) community member (shareholders in the local market) insure one another by suppressing retaliation against settlements of grievances according to norms and laws. 9) The common, organic law allows for the least time lapse between an innovation in the means of parasitism and the construction of a prohibition against this new means of parasitism expressed as new law. As such all laws are discovered. (very important) 10) high trust societies use common law to incrementally suppress all available means of free riding, leaving productive participation in the market as the only viable means of survival. 11) as a consequence, the reproduction of the lower classes is suppressed and the distribution of talents increases along with the innovations in technology. (market eugenics). Thus obviating the need for tyranny and redistribution. Aristocracy, Egalitarianism, morality, Nomocracy, meritocracy, Science, and eugenic evolution are mutually dependent. The chart below shows the incremental suppression of parasitism stating from the suppression of violence through fraud, through conspiracy, through immigration, through conquest. Only the west succeeded in developing truth. And without it we cannot have the jury. And without the jury no judge or common law. Truth matters above all else. Pseudoscience is just babylonian monotheistic mysticism in new clothes. This emperor is naked also. Truth is enough to rescue the west.