[W]ell, I am not sure we should unless we want to subsidize the production of more ideas and opinions than can be produced without subsidy. And the evidence is that we produce far more ideas and opinions than the market will bear. Propertarianism says the opposite: that you may not sell those ideas and opinions without contributing a percentage of the income to the author. We call this the Creative Commons license. Which is that creative products cannot have commercial use without compensation, but have free use for non-commercial use. This strategy does not violate the test of productivity or parasitism. This would have an enormous impact on the publishing industry, all of which would be for the better. One of the reasons, if not the most important reason that we have sh_t art, literature and cinema, is that the creative subsidy of copyright protection shifts the quality downward. This is what I object to, and I consider immoral. I do not consider individual cases of ip protection (subsidy generation) necessarily bad if they are to produce goods that the market cannot afford to. In other words, I consider IP an effective method with which a market can conduct off-book research and development at low cost and risk. In fact, I cannot think of a better combination of incentives than the private sector taking all the risk and paying all the cost of failure, and only profiting if they succeed. This is a great set of incentives.
Theme: Subsidy
-
IP: WHY SHOULD AN AUTHOR HAVE THE RIGHT TO INCOME ON IDEAS AND OPINIONS? Well, I
IP: WHY SHOULD AN AUTHOR HAVE THE RIGHT TO INCOME ON IDEAS AND OPINIONS?
Well, I am not sure we should unless we want to subsidize the production of more ideas and opinions than can be produced without subsidy. And the evidence is that we produce far more ideas and opinions than the market will bear.
Propertarianism says the opposite: that you may not sell those ideas and opinions without contributing a percentage of the income to the author. We call this the Creative Commons license. Which is that creative products cannot have commercial use without compensation, but have free use for non-commercial use.
This strategy does not violate the test of productivity or parasitism.
This would have an enormous impact on the publishing industry, all of which would be for the better.
One of the reasons, if not the most important reason that we have sh_t art, literature and cinema, is that the creative subsidy of copyright protection shifts the quality downward.
This is what I object to, and I consider immoral.
I do not consider individual cases of ip protection (subsidy generation) necessarily bad if they are to produce goods that the market cannot afford to. In other words, I consider IP an effective method with which a market can conduct off-book research and development at low cost and risk. In fact, I cannot think of a better combination of incentives than the private sector taking all the risk and paying all the cost of failure, and only profiting if they succeed. This is a great set of incentives.
Source date (UTC): 2016-01-14 04:33:00 UTC
-
NO YOU ARE WRONG ABOUT FIAT MONEY Contrary to libertine deceptions. The ambition
NO YOU ARE WRONG ABOUT FIAT MONEY
Contrary to libertine deceptions.
The ambition of rothbardianism is to resurrect Usury, not improve our lot.
If a cosmopolitan is talking and it sounds good it’s a half truth that seeks to steal from you. So you just have to go looking for it.
===
Paul (Molly)
(a) There is no reason why one must save and invest in the same medium (currency). (Just as molly suggests)
(b) fiat money constitutes shares in the issuing government and is managed as such. We literally borrow from one another.
(c) the price of commodity money (silver / gold) is more open to manipulation and more volatile than fiat currency (stock) simply because (i) scale and (ii) the treasury targets price stability (inflation).
I want the government to stop stealing from me also, but the value of a relatively stable rate of inflation, and the discounts that come from the use of fiat currency (stock), mean that I must save and invest in alternative stores of value.
Remember that hard money lenders have power over you that a government that must maintain price stability (inflation) does not. Meaning that if you issue debt then government is a problem. But if you borrow credit then inflation is your friend.
The way to fix the financialization of the economy is to i) nationalize Mastercard and ii) issue liquidity directly to consumers via that card rather than as interest rates through the banking system.
It is this revolution that some of us hope to bring about – and which will literally destroy the banking cartels.
Cheers
Curt
Source date (UTC): 2015-12-29 15:32:00 UTC
-
WE CAN LOOK AT IT BOTH WAYS Have we failed to create equality through forcible r
WE CAN LOOK AT IT BOTH WAYS
Have we failed to create equality through forcible redistribution? Or have we failed to constrain reproduction of the unproductive?
Source date (UTC): 2015-12-22 06:32:00 UTC
-
Useful: Given 1/3,1/3,1/3 budget, and that currency demand/inflation pays for th
Useful: Given 1/3,1/3,1/3 budget, and that currency demand/inflation pays for the military 1/3: ~1/2 of taxes go to those programs.
Source date (UTC): 2015-12-20 09:39:02 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/678509906077593600
Reply addressees: @pmarca
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/678486290866679809
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/678486290866679809
-
the best possible case for ‘democratic socialism,’ then there really isn’t much
the best possible case for ‘democratic socialism,’ then there really isn’t much of a case to be made” #hbd #feedly http://www.aei.org/publication/if-bernie-sanders-just-made-the-best-possible-case-for-democratic-socialism-then-there-really-isnt-much-of-a-case-to-be-made/
Source date (UTC): 2015-11-20 22:07:50 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/667826712952999936
-
7) Under the assumption that the increased risk and decreased flexibility and in
7) Under the assumption that the increased risk and decreased flexibility and increased busts can be limited by fiat credit. #nrx #AltRight
Source date (UTC): 2015-11-20 08:34:08 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/667621937594634240
-
What is the difference between robbing your neighbors every year, and having a c
What is the difference between robbing your neighbors every year, and having a child that you require your neighbors to support every year?
Source date (UTC): 2015-11-13 19:22:05 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/665248283388944384
-
What is the difference between robbing your neighbors every year, and having a c
What is the difference between robbing your neighbors every year, and having a child that you require your neighbors to support every year?
Source date (UTC): 2015-11-13 14:22:00 UTC
-
Personal Tax Annoyance of the Day: That those of us with low liquidity are taxed
Personal Tax Annoyance of the Day:
That those of us with low liquidity are taxed at the same rate as those with high liquidity. If we are to have progressive taxation, then lets tax progressively by liquidity. If we are to have income taxes, then lets not tax by year but by the production cycle.
Source date (UTC): 2015-11-04 12:14:00 UTC