Theme: Property

  • Now the odd concept here, is the pretense that it’s possible to produce a polity

    Now the odd concept here, is the pretense that it’s possible to produce a polity with a durable economy without a power distribution of law, a Pareto distribution of assets (wealth), and a nash equilibrium of income.

    It isn’t possible. Its universal. Because the only alternative is authoritarianism which centralizes it more, and makes everyone dependent.

    But then, any economist knows this.

    So the only problem we CAN fix is to eradicate unearned wealth, by some form of rent seeing or corruption. And like I said, that’s not hard,


    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-25 22:50:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1629614767097667585

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1629603454015635456

  • WHO CREATES MONEY? Money consists of commodity money. Technically no one creates

    WHO CREATES MONEY?
    Money consists of commodity money. Technically no one creates commodity money any longer, everyone creates commodity money substitutes we call currencies, and almost exclusively fiat or monopoly State currencies.
    The treasury, the central bank, all dependent banks, any institution that can loan on a fractional reserve, every investment institution that can issue speculative debt instruments, and anyone who can issue credit via any of the above can create money substitutes.
    Why? Because while a Treasury (at least today) creates currency and coins as fiat money, the vast majority of monetary creation is through credit money: records of debt, all of which are insured by the State (to some degree), and therefore by the people, and backed only by present demand and speculation on the future production of the people whose surplus via taxes paid by the people.
    As such all fiat money, as a money substitute, consists of a share of stock in the corporation of the state, and trades on the markets as a share of the state.
    However, there is no current method of competing internationally against the capacity of States to issue shares to use as currency, to use as a money substitute, largely in the form of debt records, precisely because credit expansion is the most efficient method of producing incentives to produce while at the same time producing self-determination by sovereignty in demonstrated interest and reciprocity in display word and deed we call sovereignty, liberty, freedom, insurance, and security that we all appear to favor more so than their absence. πŸ˜‰
    But, like I said, institutions lag. And this problem is easily corrected. And I’ve written the law to correct it. Had the bank of England started out ‘properly’ then it might not have. But they created the foundations of state money and banking, which from their origins maintained the control of that money by the investors in the central (state) banks.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-25 22:45:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1629613642508369927

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1629607518124273664

  • Thank you. Yes, this is a catastrophic problem. First, they disintermediated the

    Thank you. Yes, this is a catastrophic problem. First, they disintermediated the people from use of the court for suits against impositions of costs on the commons (why we have environmental issues) then they disintermediated the people from using the court for suits against an increasing scope of functionaries –
    made far worse by first managerial government, and second, by the replacement of meritocratic staff, with credentialed staff in the postwar period. And so, this ‘hole’ in the law is along with a half dozen others, one of the weakest properties of our law.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-24 03:25:38 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1628959307256455181

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1628956128410325012

  • GOVERNMENTS HAVE NO RIGHTS. Let me help you: – A right consists, and can only co

    GOVERNMENTS HAVE NO RIGHTS.
    Let me help you:
    – A right consists, and can only consist of, and can only be created by, a group of insurers, who will insure a right. A right to demand an insurer defend one’s interest against those who impose upon them (deprive, harm, impeded).
    – To create this insurance, people form polities, and eventually governments and militaries to insure those rights.
    – So There is only one universal cause of rights: reciprocal insurance of self-determination by self-determined means: individual sovereignty over display, word, deed, and the proceeds obtained by them, withougt violating the sovereignty of others by the same criteria.
    – All other rights are mere application of the right to self-determination by self-determined means.
    – Only people can have rights. And people can organize into polities, states, alliances, and federations to secure rights for their people.
    – Governments cannot have rights.
    – Governments have capabilities – not rights.
    – Governments can create, deny, or destroy rights.
    – Western civilization is organized to construct rights.
    – Western governments are organized to construct rights.
    – Westerners may disagree on what constitutes a right, and seek to (falsely) claim rights extend to wants, privileges, and wishful thinking. But we do not disagree that we should construct rights.
    – When rights are constructed by people, governments, militaries, states, and federations, then empires are effectively prohibited. Because empires depend on depriving people of rights – particularly the right to self-determination by self-determined means.
    – The small, homogeneous, nation-state is the only political system under which rights are possible without depriving some other group of their want of the right of self-determination by self-determined means.
    – As such, under our right of self-determination by self-determined means, and the human rights necessary to preserve it, we are limited to producing safety in numbers,
    by alliances of nation-states in federations – and we are prohibited from empires.
    – This is the cause of remaining world conflict: China, Russia, and Iran – and anyone wishing to increase borders, are the remaining empires. Those empires have ‘castes’ (elites) that profit by predation (corruption) on their people.
    – And Russia, China, Iran (and those few remaining despotic regimes that prey on their people) wish to conquer and deprive other people of self-determination by self-determined means.
    – Insuring rights to self-determination by self-determined means, provides the opportunity and incentive for cooperation, provides rule of law to facilitate and defend cooperation, and suppress corruption (as much as possible at least).
    – And the evidence across the world is that every group of people is seeking that sovereignty necessary to produce self-determination by self-determined means and the rights necessary under it.
    – So just as farming spread around the world, creating states and empires, industry is spreading around the world creating nation-states and federations.
    – Would the people of China, Russia, and Iran prefer self-determination by human rights? Of course. They say so.
    – Also would the people of the world prefer to defend against the abuse of rights we call ‘liberalism’ that defend decadence, which is an imposition upon the rights to self-determination by self-determined means, that require the production of the first organization upon which all others depend in order to produce an intergenerational polity: the family? Yes.
    – The west does not live under rights, sufficient to preserve the family, and as a consequence, society, economy, and polity necessary to preserve those rights – because the west has licensed baiting into the hazard of decadence, as a harm to the institution of the family, and as a consequence, the society, economy, and polity.
    – As such, we must clarify the law, to prevent ‘harms’ of ‘liberalism’ (selfishness) harming the polity. (We did.)
    -FIN-


    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-23 17:40:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1628812102960922624

  • Just as yuks. What happens when red states charge California for water?

    Just as yuks.
    What happens when red states charge California for water?


    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-20 17:41:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627725132935331861

    Reply addressees: @chermattson @DeanObeidallah @mtgreenee

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627723317518925851

  • WHAT’S MONEY AND NOT? Sharing again. I should make a larger more complete versio

    WHAT’S MONEY AND NOT? Sharing again. I should make a larger more complete versio

    WHAT’S MONEY AND NOT?

    Sharing again. I should make a larger more complete version of this graphic, with the properties of each instrument, because I have to explain this nonsense about twice a month.

    I’d do a video on monetary & financial instruments because the public would benefit from it. But it’d just result in a bunch of sperg’s nonsense to reply to.

    For serious folks, read Georg Simel’s Philosophy of Money, Mises relevant chapters in Human Action, and Rothbard’s Mystery of Banking. These Jews are to money what Europeans are to science and technology – even if they don’t ‘get it’ in the end: the west won with trust, productivity, and commons under European law and ethics, which prohibits much of what plagues Jewish law and ethics: externalization of, and construction of, profits from risk by baiting into hazard, preference for it over productivity, despite the antagonism it produces over time, especially for the little people.

    WHAT’S MISSING
    The left side should start with Time. I base my work on the first principle of time (entropy). So all capital, and all capital in the form of commodities serves as a store of time, and all cooperation results in savings of time.

    “So we are not wealthier than cave men we have made everything infinitely cheaper.”


    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-17 18:01:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1626642932093558786

  • Q: “WHAT’S YOUR CURRENT OPINION ON BITCOIN?” 1) a BTC is a “Share of stock in th

    Q: “WHAT’S YOUR CURRENT OPINION ON BITCOIN?”

    1) a BTC is a “Share of stock in the BTC network”. Knowing that it’s a share in the BTC network helps you understand what it is – everything else is what someone claims it is. It is dependent on that network. It is not backed by anything but demand. It is not insured by anyone or anything – and can’t be. It can fluctuate as any other stock, the network can drive the price to zero, with zero demand (the equivalent of bankruptcy).

    2) the goal was to make these shares useful substitutes for monetary transactions. In this case, then those shares function as what’s called “Token Money Substitutes”. (Like buying tickets for rides at a carnival)

    3) IT hasn’t resulted in that outcome for the simple reason that user interface limitations, transaction response time, and limited acceptance because of limited demand, haven’t provided enough incentives.

    4) As a consequence BTC has filled a more traditional role as a stock, and store of value, in the hopes that developers will solve the technical problems above.

    5) Is this technology an innovation? Let’s disambiguate whether it’s a novel technology, and one that’s a novel innovation that survives in the marketplace. That judgment depends on answering whether it’s not just better to fund a distributed data store under traditional transaction processing, able to handle high volume transactions, using encryption but without proof of work or stake. It’s rather easy to design and program that system with current technology, and ride on the existing networking protocols without any bank intervention.

    6) The criticism of this approach is that it requires a corporation, investors, etc. But how is that different from BTC? I invested in a company that monitored who processed what transactions and predicted who would process the next one or two or three etc, and it became obvious that for all intents and purposes, the system was always fighting to not evolve into a cartel.

    8) But compare that to BTC: (a) The power consumption problem is absurd. (b) The alternative proof of stake is absurd (c) The absence of an insurer of last resort is absurd. (d) AFAIK we’re doing research and development for the State’s development of a digital currency which will subject us to even greater manipulation than ‘social credit’ scores. (e) And the pretense that the state can’t either shut down BTC, declare a 30 day price to convert BTC into FEDCOIN before prohibiting it, or prosecuting it into something used only by criminals, is equally absurd.

    9) So, I’ve had the same opinion for almost ten years: (a) The only long-term value of BTC is the experiment with whether the public will tolerate a digital currency – that test succeeded. (b) But the technology stack has failed to solve the problem of concurrency, volume, insurability, and restitutability. (c) So the result will be a hybrid model of encryption, the ledger, and a privately held, distributed high-performance network OR the state equivalent OR both.

    10) Now, there are a lot of people who will agree with me but if you understand the fundamental problems, then the only possible solution is serialization in a distributed network, that is insured, restitutable, reversible, fast, and so integrated into the economy that we can’t do without it. IMO it also requires protective LEGISLATION.

    11) I’m bullish only for circumventing the banking system for cost-free transfers of title whether that title be to assets of monetary substitutes, or assets of financial instruments, or assets in the real world.

    12) And my primary interest is making it so the poor have cost-free access to digital banking, borrowing, and redistribution if destitute. The rest of us will do just fine.

    13) I haven’t been wrong. I’m not often wrong. I don’t think I’ll be wrong. Because I don’t think I CAN be wrong. That doesn’t mean BTC won’t survive. It only means BTC is very likely BETAMAX or CDROM while we wait for VHS or Flash Drives.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-15 02:53:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1625689750953664513

  • Pairing off > Serial Monogamy > Monogamy Why? Marriage evolved because of proper

    Pairing off > Serial Monogamy > Monogamy
    Why?
    Marriage evolved because of property. Marriage is a corporation for the preservation of capital (property).
    Why is marriage dissolving along with reproduction and intergenerational transfer of capital?
    Same reason.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-08 18:15:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1623385013478727681

    Reply addressees: @miner49er236

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1623384079826558977

  • RT @LukeWeinhagen: @toodarkmark @ContraFabianist @curtdoolittle Does the framewo

    RT @LukeWeinhagen: @toodarkmark @ContraFabianist @curtdoolittle Does the framework offer you ownership without demonstrating interest?

    Are…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-06 15:06:15 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1622612644644417536

  • Don’t lie. Socialism means “state ownership of property and state control of org

    Don’t lie. Socialism means “state ownership of property and state control of organization of the means of production”

    You’ve listed ‘commons’ produced under anglo classical liberalism (capitalism).


    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-02 23:21:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1621287764787433472

    Reply addressees: @JimmyStreich

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1621287405641687043