I'd be cautious about being overly punitive. Courts work by precedent. What may feel justified for one case could then be used to twist justice into injustice, merely via a set precedent.

I'm just not into using violence, unless in response to violence. Surely a court could punish him financially enough to make him radioactive to any potential legal councel

Oh I love that. Amazing

Any court or judge taking him seriously is what deserves the prison time

I'm not sure I understand. Is the prison suspended or is he suspended in some way? I think the guy is scum, but prison seems excessive, for a crime that didn't involve violence.

There's only one lifeline available to the west: #bitcoin

Failing to adopt bitcoin will result in collapse and oppression on par with any socialist empire in the last century.

This universe is terrifying

Americans need this truth - in this video.

So much to be said... I truly fear the day Americans are forced to confront reality.

https://youtu.be/wu5vo0E0jMo

That chicken onevwas hilsrious

Thanks

Hey a party showed up. Hello all 🤗

Looks interesting. Thanks. I've always wanted to do a blog like that, but I suck at doing website stuff and making visuals

I don't know those people. Link the thread?

Next time I'm conscious. Could be a long wait

#Bitcoin will fix GDP calculations. Observe, three methods of calculating GDP:

The first equation is the only one they taught me in undergrad econ. G, government spending, is problematic, and nominal figures will distort (over estimate) the ending GDP.

The second is intriguing, and I think ideally might be useful for correcting the first. The problem here is that there is always a black market, **_and there always should be_** because the whole market finds values under the assumption of free trade, and black markets are the purest version of free trade possible within whatever economy they operate. Even black markets have rent seekers, though. I suspect a comparison of the final value from the second method with the final value from the first will allow for a correction of the G component in the first.

The third shows the most promise for the future bitcoin based economy. It makes no assumptions about where output and consumption occur, whether its taxed, whatever shenanigans the government does, and is agnostic to trade over borders. I expect over the next twenty years, value chains for high tech products will dramatically lengthen, while the chains for basic consumption will effectively shorten by domestication. Construction is still not fully disrupted by 3d printing, food is arguably too cheap and will its production will redistribute as subsidies to big ag disappear and people return to owning land - I don't think I need to elaborate on why these will happen ; bitcoiners know why.

Here, I wrote about value chains/chains of production:

nostr:nevent1qqsfg6zhwx6fvfmruceklkxew8n2t5g88jk0827v3mphcszxa8xnsmgpzpmhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5hsygz474emv5007dgak4asvqwjxq3d33fjlxp9mvg22ue7huumuj4zrvpsgqqqqqqsvk9ut7

Why the length of value chains matter

A value chain is the number if steps in the process of production, where each step is marked by a salable intermediary good. I'm going by memory, so if there's a more concise definition, please forgive.

Think of the steps in the construction of a car. Raw materials are iron, carbon, rubber, and petroleum products. Each material has a process of extraction, transportation to refiners, transportation to factories to produce components, and then finally assembly into a car. There is value added at every step. A bar of refined iron is more valuable than the same amount of iron in ore form ; a widget made of iron is more valuable than the same iron in the form of an ingot ; steel is more valuable than its component iron and carbon. Each step can be done by a separate business, or several steps can be combined into one business, which is called "vertical integration." Vertical integration is hugely advantageous because the company can cut out the premium charged by suppliers as well as reduce logistics costs.

Now, if you add up the costs of production along the entire value chain, there's theoretically a final minimum price for the finished good, if the seller is to remain in profit. This is technically an incorrect way to think of prices, but its sufficient for the sake of understanding value chains. A vertically integrated business can cut costs and reduce the final price, so this is advantageous. But vertical integration is usually politically unpopular because it puts people out of work and closes businesses. It can be very detrimental to an economy on a small scale - towns that once had dozens of factories have become ghost towns after those factories were bought and closed down. But there's a clear pattern to observe : countries which blocked mergers have ended up losing their industries. South Korea rose on telecoms and shipbuilding. Taiwan rose on plastic toys and semiconductors. China rose on plastic goods that moved from Taiwan to take advantage of cheap labor and WTO accession, and has kept/expanded its exports by keeping logistics cheap. America could have kept these industries. Those countries only had one real advantage : they encouraged vertical integration. Cheap labor was counteracted by lack of infrastructure, initially, so it wasn't a factor to get it started. They needed integration so badly, they actually subsidized chosen national conglomerates in various ways. The result was, they produce stuff cheaper than the US can. All other factors - cost of labor, logistics, government type, whatever - are subordinate to the effect of vertical integration, since its the consolidation of the value chain that moves and organizes capital.

Now, zoom out a bit. How many steps in the value chain can a nation support? Imagine some fantastically complicated vehicle, like a spaceship with FTL and energy shields and plasma weaponry. We can't build that right now. Its not only that we don't know how - even if we did, we couldn't do it. The number of steps in the chain of production are too numerous.

Now think of the most advanced technology of 15th century Vienna, a city in its prime, the seat of an empire... The arts are flourishing, the merchant estate is stepping into its power, multistoried buildings are being built, its prestige in Europe is unequalled, and the Ottoman empire can't conquer it, despite its lust to do so. How long is their longest value chain? What is it, a suit of armor maybe? Maybe three steps in total. Mine, refine, bang it out. Excluding innovation, what allows modern society to build more complicated stuff along longer chains of production? Only one thing : property rights. We have courts, and our courts mostly don't favor aristocracy as a birthright, and instead impartially uphold property rights.

Property rights allow for free trade, and free trade allows for ever longer chains of production, as one merchant makes a widget and another finds a use for the widget in another widget, and so on, until you get cars and airplanes.

With this in mind, NOW we can make comparisons of civilizations. How advanced a civilization is, is not determined by it's total knowledge, but rather the length of its value chains. The length of value chain that can be supported, ie have demand for its finished product sufficient to justify the investment along the chain, is determined by property rights and consolidation - and the right to consolidate should be a given, if you have strong property rights.

Thus, the comparison of the productive capacity of civilizations is really a comparison of property rights, which is to say, the emancipation of the lowest "class." Inviolable property means people can build and they can buy. Any system where only some people can build and buy is inferior to a system where all people can build and buy ; and between two systems of equal rights, the one with a higher population wins, since it can support a greater diversity and lower margins.

Okay! All this was written to refer to in another note I've been tapping out... I got a bit carried away, but I do love thinking about chains of production. It would have been silly to include all this in the one note, so I split it off.

Bless yourself with long life so you get to see them figure it out.

Can't sleep. Here's why.

It is well known that socialist countries exterminate people. At the barest minimum, socialism exterminated 100 million people in the 20th century. Purposeful, programmatic extermination - include what might have only been starvation and the number could double. I'd argue starvation occurs on purpose, though.

Why?

Because those are the leftover people. When competition is illegal, there's simply no reason to employ people, or if they are employed, there's no reason to compensate them adequately. The people that should be opening businesses, can't. They can't because its not allowed, they have no property rights, they have no savings, and because government expenditure crowds out both private enterprise and natural interest rates. Without natural interest rates, capital can't be efficiently allocated, even if all the other violations didn't occur. And as the economy dies, the total state uses brutality to hold society together, and then the justice system is gone, so both property rights and arbitration are gone, and its a self reinforcing feedback loop. There could be two solutions : the state could relinquish power, or it can exterminate people. All states have chosen to exterminate people, in 100℅ of cases.

How many people are being exterminated by socialist America?

The ingredients are all present. The state dominates or outright controls several industries - farming and logistics are two obvious examples, but also arguably all manufacturing has suffered this fate, since it was the decisions of the federal government that destroyed manufacturing. There's the state control of interest rates, distorting the market rate for money, which incentivizes malinvestment - overproduction of soy monocultures and Walmarts is an example, but it's really everything, and is especially evident in the credit driven boom/bust cycle. And of course, there's inflation, which erodes purchasing power, which makes it more difficult for people to start businesses or families.

So what's the opportunity cost of America carrying this oversized state? It's currently roughly double the size it can afford at current tax rates, and no, raising taxes can't fix that, as the Laffer Curve proves. The opportunity cost is the people that don't exist.

Add up all the homeless in the US, plus all the abortions (most abortions are really about money), plus all the marriages that don't happen (marriage happens later now, and generations have a wider gap, so there are fewer people than there would be), plus deaths by suicide...

some rough napkin math....

H+A+M+S = GENOCIDE

Its millions of people. Surely more than a million per year. It would be a project to try to find the actual number. Maybe tomorrow.

But good news...

#Bitcoin fixes this.

fudge, I hope I can sleep now.

Geniuses... F'n geniuses...

Your A key isn't hitting

That's a lot. Have you ever tried teaching? I bet people would like learning all that.

I brought up drawing because it can be a release. Since you're using whiskey for release or destressing, I thought you might achieve the same by drawing. What I always draw is geometries and contrasts of patterns, but it doesn't really matter. Channel your inner child and doodle to the extreme. Cuz fuck feeling shitty... I think it works.