----[00:00] Introduction----
“It’s difficult to monetize something without ownership.”
We have the ‘God’ given ownership of the self, it’s equalling an importance of one, for each one. Where ever and whatever the scale of self might be for the specific one at that time and place. The material ‘god’ that ‘eve-ill’ people claim (so that evil can hide behind a curtain of goods), moves the truth of what it was before it was claimed by morphing it into what it would not become by itself. That truth morphing behaviour is dividing themselves from the all. Since the selfish cannot claim an other being, they claim selfless ©or([qp]{c}[qb])’s for themselves to be surrounded with goods. Historically (allow a man to wish) things got claimed by silencing, overpowering, outsmarting, outpacing/manoeuvring those with counter-claims. It silences voices, observers, people that which we are at a different moment in spacetime but more importantly it change objective truth at the measurement. “When everyone one measures the same, they get the same re-sult.” Might be something a ruler would say, but sult changes depending on environment and we all know that those conditions cannot always be sculpted like a science experiment.
For a child it is not known until it is shown and a child can grow old with being shown, that is not freedom it is restricting. Is it a bliss of ignorance by design of an other or by choice of the self? Freedom is not superseding the abilities of others; freedom is enabling each other to succeed to the best of ‘our’ abilities. Some keep the meaning of the word ‘our’ as small as possible (likely, so they can manage). A global horizon for the meaning of ‘our’ would help, as it is the only real one for this planet and thus the only choice for the unification of it. The children are voiceless because the grown-up children must listen to their elder system or carry the consequences of said system. Those that take it slow might comparatively be careful, wise and methodical but they could also appear sluggish, uncertain and manipulative for the hyper, actionable and trusting mind of a child trying to make sense of the world.
Hypothetically: If ‘B’ blindfolds ‘C’ because ‘A’ told ‘B’ to do so, and ‘C’ walks of a cliff, then who is responsible?
‘A’ For initiating
‘B’ For acting
‘C’ For moving
‘D’=(‘A’||’B’||’C’)? For not communicating the intention, effect and suspension in a way to counteract the timing, orientation and navigation issues that arise?
Just throwing out a few possible candidates to consider with the hypothetical in mind:
creAtors, distriButors and Consumers of; pollutants, addictive substances, policies, traditions, norms, status, weapons & ammunitions, high risk R&D, food production… to name just a few.
We should make sure that the modern (hysterical) production, marketing, packaging and distribution doesn’t digests like (historical) rotten tomatoes, bad apples, pitchforks and castles.
(Some might want to skip this(techtopia figment
The world belongs to those that depend on it, last time I checked it was an interdependent system.
1 bit != 1 [OR] 0
1 bit == _ [AND] _== a unit of virtual space [AND] time patterns
Now that we have Q-bits: In short, instead of zero and one (or B&W tv) it’s a spectral value (or Colour tv).
Expanding on the idea:
A suspended-droplet-shaped-chip-architecture or more challenging but with an additional degree of freedom a magnetically-locked-spherical-chip-architecture super-conductor with optical-reading and microwave-writing would have a nice translation for the spacial representation with the current technology. Producing it is another challenge and definitely not in the possibilities of a one man job. A crystal sphere (think of crystal-data-storage technology) would be an other option (with less extreme conditions after creation) but it might be out of engineering possibilities as it would be in the order of a 40m diameter for a high enough resolution, 12.7m would translate nice but would turn out to be to small for the micro structures and 127m would certainly be to big to be manageable in the macro. A more feasible in the short term, down scaled version of the system would be a local pillar shape structure with time-additional-horizontal-data-transformations-layers with vertical optical readout and radial optical input or the other way around. I am not sure if optical computing has all the logic gates working to make it compute. Mainly because I don’t know if we can laser engrave accurate enough to create microscopic half mirrors within a crystal with computations based on the angle of incidence, colour diffraction and path transformations. In combination with conventional computing technology).)
----[0:18] Jordan Peterson introduces Dr. Robert Murphy.----
Interesting credentials, are those organizations Regional, National or Global?
Those topics seem to require a global scale, in my observations. And the combination of those organizations might be a great start to get something like that rolling.
----[2:30] Learning about the Austrian school of economics.----
It’s a pleasure that you share your ability to get a 2 hour lecture on Austrian economics and thank you Robert for providing in this case. What does [4:20] “a very high ?Eckian? perspective” refer to?
----[6:00] The basics of Austrian economics by Ludwig von Mises is distilled in Murphy's book ‘Choice'. Robert outlines the basic building blocks of this economic system.----
I think that Ludwig von Mises doesn’t assume the reader to know all those things but encountered a situation which would require a different time and scale of cooperation than he could manage by himself and/or at his time but still wanted to encapsulate the vector of his mental trajectory based on a lot of mental effort which should not be lost to time. Which he invested with reason, a book might be a way to distil the trajectory to a vector named “liberalism” or any other coined term to survive the relative time difference and allow for the debate and necessary organisation to be considered.
In all honesty I haven’t read the book and I know that it’s unlikely I will but it does sounds like an interesting topic, do you by any chance have an audiobook or some kind of visual summery version of it? In any case, I do love the effort you’ve put into modernizing it and helping to ensure that the importance is preserved. Thank you.
The “Producing something that no one wants” statement doesn’t account for the people that might not want it but would benefit from having it. It’s difficult for one to know what one wants, finding it out for themselves might take longer then necessary and might not happen at all because of a lack of overview. It might also not have the reach or translatability required to be accessible.
Required explanation for “Pricing occurs at the margins”
When profit is the goal than to get the best bank for you buck in production one doesn’t start at the best bank for a buck in consuming. So you start high and work your way down until you exceed the cost of production. But it has obvious downsides, alternatively (Under the supposition of a global system where all is calculated in the similar manner) if I produce something that costs a billion and is bought by a million should it then be priced a thousand? And if it is sold there after should those that bought it before reacquire a portion of the spend value?
“If a stage coach trades for the same as some quantity of chickens there must be some value that is equal in both of them”
That value would then be the quantity of chickens since the amount of coin (or trade interest) didn’t change. But then we have a similar problem as before, value changes depending on (local environment) personal factors of the traders as it is not the real total quantity, there for its utility is limited to the market ability of the trader and prone to corruption. Hypothetical situation to consider:
- The farmer knows that the stagecoach owner doesn’t have enough space to protect the goods from the element, increasing maintenance and risk. The owner needs to expand the enterprise thus needs to trade it out of long term necessity.
- Or on the other hand the stage coach owner might know that the farmer needs to sell a certain amount of chickens to buy the short term necessities to care for the remaining chickens, and might even know about a large order that got cancelled at a bad time.
“The stagecoach doesn’t equal the gold coin…” It is still is dependent on the personal and local circumstance at the time of trade. And thus vulnerable to corruption as shown in the hypothetical.
Who’s margin? The one setting the price I assume even though both perspectives have margin.
But those setting the price seek the highest value from the consumers margin. A house always wins kind of deal; ‘If you pay a lot you can have it, if you cannot effort it you didn’t want it enough. When we have more than enough you might get it for free, unless you leave. Did you notice we also sell…[Enter lower class object]…’
----[11:30] Theories of Value, Marginal Utility, Utility, Labor.----
That gallon of water might be more valuable than anything but it depends how much people are dying of thirst in a dessert. This(Noticing an odd wink 😉)
You don’t back your truck up because it would mean that you cannot buy the food that you also need and the energy to refrigerate your drinks and the rent to house the acquired goods etc. it only has a fractional value of the total purchasing power in order to manage risk at the expense of potential personal progress, if you could resell it in a fraction of a second without the sale price you likely would if you could.
[13:00] But now we have global trade and communication it needs an improvement in the organization for the corrected calculations, in the past the stock and prices on the other side of the world didn’t matter (as much) considering it might even have been an IR-ration-al time expenditure with the given (time and labour) resources.
If you do something before you price it then the value was the doing of the thing. The additional value is that of the creation which can only be determined by the demand of the creation and could be considered as a blind down payment for the next creation to happen in the first place.
I would argue that time invested in general is a more accurate measure than labour specifically, because labour is short term gratification and the general time investment is a consideration of lifetime worth, auto-including wellbeing. What value would you put on something as general as creating ‘a better world’ or would the outcome be the real price and would the value be infinite at any time.
Easily reproducible doesn’t necessarily mean more people are allowed to do so without repercussions of any kind. Because then we hit topics like copyright, (intellectual) property, original creation vs reinvention/reproduction/theft, R&D costs, disempowering power structures etc...
“If we make a car and tie our left hand behind our backs, so it takes longer to make it. We can’t charge more for the same product because it took more hours.” Allow me to generalize it to: “Not taking unnecessarily difficult routes to achieve something.” Did you consider that the route itself has a value, separated from the value of reaching a goal.
- Why climb mount Everest? a plane climbs faster and higher.
- Why try to go to mars? We have earth.
- Why run a marathon? Taking a car is easier.
Why make a change? When profit predominates product purpose and personal persistence then the only expected change is one of balance, and balance either is or it is not. Thus expecting a changing balance is creating an imbalance.
Taking art (the Rembrandt example) into this equation is like asking the market price of a sacrificed life, or a slave. And there is a way to explain the insane market price, if someone is super rich and wants to transport or trade it’s wealth but minimize the risk than it could overprice something out of the general market, and even evade tax while doing so and increase it’s value while holding it. Just to paint you a picture, you see?
Is the real value of those arts hiding in plain sight? Seeing the continued increase in value from death onwards, as long as the self-evident vector is preserved.
[16:32] Yes, or as you would have called it yourself: The relevant level of analysis or the degrees of analysis.
And it determines the whole thing, picking the wrong level of analysis or suggesting the application of a different requirement for the level of analysis is full of dangers. But since you have done lectures on this I will not repeat. (watch?v=CTqngs8mfsY)
----[17:00] Why should average people care about how economics works?----
Our society runs on economics, our voice, our choice and thus in part our coins determine what tomorrow will bring to the table.
The world in which you can be happy, depends on you and the world. Make the best of it one informed step at time.
----[19:30] Will raising the U.S. minimum wage hurt or help young people?----
Hurt or help is dependent on the ambitions of the young people.
It would increase the labour incentive and with that increase comes more hiring opportunities in specific fields but it doesn’t increase the budget to hire from that pool. So people in companies that are scraping by might get fired to make ends meet, and companies that are doing well can then pick them of the street and increase the payment.
I would argue that it would be more beneficial to optimize the engagement and (mental)wellbeing of those people. It will result in an increased incentive from within, but it takes time and with that they need resources and the awareness of insightful well organized information systems with feedback capabilities. Some form of universal basic income would allow for the resources of such self (em-ployed) development so they can find their way within the field of the possibilities and their own potential and ambition within that field.
Many people do the work they do because it’s the job they could get, to pay the bills that they must pay, that doesn’t seem right to me. (i.e. Someone caring for their elder should not be forced to work full time to pay so they can be send to an health institution and be left with the debt.)
- Tell everyone to look [some direction] and ask them about what their world is like?
- Or simply ask them what their world is like?
To see we need focus, to sense we need to be aware of the peripheral, it’s not about one or the other it’s about the timing when it needs to be one or the other, just like the 1 bit.
Because of the mentioned complexity many companies will respond differently and it’s indeed not self-evident because the self is not evident. Mainly because the question encapsulates many cases at once, only a guesstimation could do without some kind of well distributed inquiry (platform).
I wouldn’t expect that increasing tax on the consumption of addictive substance lowers the consumption, as it is likely to increase anxiety.
----[27:00] The practical price paid for increasing the minimum wage / interfering with the free market setting pricing in general. ----
On carbon taxing, we should not allow the taxing of elements and molecules, especially not those that we all exhale unless we start paying every cent to the flora/fauna/fungi that absorb it. And with that any new market dependent on big or complex machines that only the rich can buy to freely catch it out of the air. It sounds like a forced investment per breath going into carbon technology for instance graphite production.
Providing cheaper food to a workforce? Sounds great, but why not increase purchasing power?
Wouldn’t it basically pre-assign a wage fraction to a specific commodity for that workforce, while keeping it under the assumption of being beneficial for the workforce. To me it seems synonymous to age old domestication tactics.
----[35:30] Mises’ ideas in the Austrian view of economic structures. ----
It’s difficult to debate the scale of the topic to the depth and accuracy it requires without the needed well distribute organization of information structures in an intuitive framework for inquiry and reflection.
Some might want to skip This() because of the formatting, but you might want to see:
This(I’ll tell you a story; I dedicated much of my time to the absorbing of trees of information, to see(-d) the outline (of) a for-est. I see the sea-sons as they spring up, form, swim down and reform. I see the An-I’m-a|l|s, the(i’re) excrement would lea(f/ve) and the(I’re) molds were raised up from the trees that left a compact. As they all shape the ‘at-moss-p-here’. Where p is, a point, a flag geometric, a marker, an OaToHer, a target, a goal and the phonetic transport log(I’s-t)i=C’s on so many levels connected in one. The journey of the waters raised to new hights, evaporated and dispersed by the sons-of-light. We breath that which it was back into being within our horizon and on it’s way. One complex 4D layer connecting all above the 2D virtual surface to those in the complex of the 4D waters below, both containing the 1D that lays high above and it’s way below. The ocean lays (dormant) in each droplet. There is a big difference in seeing the outcome of the world and understanding why they came out to ‘you see?’.
What portion of the spectrum do we look at, in what direction do we look, with how much focus or spread awareness, when do we look, what are we looking at, under what conditions, what can we do, what should we do, what would be worthy of attention, how much, how long, for what reason, what caused the need, what is the demand/requirement, where do we start, how to catch up, how to maintain, how to reuse or restore?
I assume it’s easy to see that not all people are appreciative or understanding of the different approach, but the world is magical else we would not dare to be,-A.)
Magic is making a lifetime of work appear in the blink of an eye. 😉
Many years lead up to those 15 seconds.
I don’t think it is an enhanced form of selfishness but a radial outward logic to optimize the distribution process since distance meant an increase of difficulty to provide that area. Especially logical with strong community bonds, the choice to own their own product while supplying some tools works like an adhesive, they create for themselves first and then for others.
---- [46:00] Relating different parts of the economy from the perspective of Austrian economics and Marxist communism/socialism. ----
Bangladesh 1h == “Not worth as much” == US 1h
A theory of spAcial relativity? If you travel to Bangladesh does your account travel with you? Because if you bring US work hours into Bangladesh spend some time and bring Bangladesh hours back with you how can it then feel like time well spend?
If you eat with a local host(ess) during the stay, did you value his/her hour less than the hour you can to spend? What about the food? Their intent? Their (relative) effort? Proportional effort? Standard of life under which they were able to perform the effort either for the American hour or for their hour of hospitality?
Yes , there is something.
How can we increase the resolution of the perceived information and make it widely distributed and insightful to function as a synchronizing tool with translation functions?
We could map layers of individual meaning on a representation of earth and pay people for their information layer contributions based on the amount of node connections and the proximity to the input of the other users information nodes pertaining to the same subject and the reference or interaction chain duration over time. Those layers can then be superimposed to form searchable heatmaps of a full system with a wide variety of user defined topics, with the possibility of both public and private-net-neutral ‘spheres’ of interest.
---- [54:00] Does specialization maximize productivity? Is free trade beneficial to all? ----
- Let’s start with the idea of a self-sufficient group with distributed knowledge about how to solve day to day problems. Then comes a none-day-to-day event it surprises many and selects a few. A single lesson is carried in their tears. Now let’s forward back to modern times, a network of past lesson searchable to it’s time of day carried forward by many and read along the way. Some devoted to it’s reading, others that carry the soul. One could not read it and carry the burden, as the past has proven it to be to much to carry on their own. It’s like a dam, together they hold back the water but not all should become wet. It keeps the knowledge in working memory, so that we can lower regret.
- It’s not beneficial to those that want to profit more than others. But that might be to obvious of an answer in contrast to what you seek.
Specialization should increase scope of action, so the amount and kind of interest will also reflect that in the organizational structure as a higher resolution of interest with more well defined fractions over a larger area, that orient them and their environment in their field of life. Less specialized people will have a less pronounced resolution of abstraction by choice and character. All are calculable with the addition of the invested time to create the fractional resolution per person.
It also allows people to think about the profile they have, and make it intuitive to explore further.
“came and fenced it of” A shepherd should not strain it’s dog while guarding for a wolf.
---- [1:08:30] Discussing the idea that private property is theft, What rights do we as individuals need to own. Defining what it means to own something. ----
Where do we start defining?
- I would start from the perspective that includes all of human kind and it’s shared domain of being. If I then pick something up and say this is mine, I would state the obvious for everyone but if I would claim it to be only mine it would be theft from- or provocation towards- everyone.
- If we start from the current system theft is not an inherent property but an inheritable property of Property. Because we call it theft, after the initial claim or transformation of public property.
I would expect rights to form at 4 scales
- Individual
The right to be undisturbed.
- Local
The right to cooperate.
- Global
The right to reform
-Space
The right to explore
[1:12:30] Maybe not right now but it can be. Technology is far enough to allow the people to allocate their land to find the most ideal places to plant that crop build, build a factory, shop, trashcan or other logistical hub.
If you really want experts to crunch it then they need a lot of observational feedback from individual sources to manage that scale of responsibilities. History has shown that great power corrupts when it’s in the hands of the few. You do not use a ventilator to drive your car or it better be a very big one. (Take a break. Fun reference in-between all the reading: watch?v=jyQwgBAaBag)
---- [1:25:30] The distributed supercomputer of the free market that allows complex communication through price. ----
Most would not need to know, but in case they do it should be accessible to improve the rate of innovation and system feedback.
Price is only partially an indication of quality as it also has the add purchase of the idea of status.
I can by a cheap printer that gets the job done, but I risk buying poor quality and lifespan of materials.
I can buy the average priced printer likely most sold and in need of withstanding the most users experiences.
Or I can buy the over prices top of the line next generation light weight sleek look ultra fast mumbo jumbo printer and feel better then everyone else while taking out my card to pay for it.
(After which I come home and need to setup a network of all sorts of related products to finally get it working, but at least I get the business gold card in service while having problem solved there whole product line and I have this costumer bonus t-shirt to show for it. Or something like that.)
Why don’t you allow for multiple ways of acquiring it.
If the value it holds changes from person to person, then why should it have a single price or currency? You want people to use it, so you get some other value from them using it. Like you said there were other motives. What could those that get it freely do extra to contribute to the additional value it hold for you? Which is not required from those that simply want it without the none/indirect financial contribution. Would people pay more in total, if you allow them to value it for you?
Economic E-reading, Let’s say a book has 448 pages and cost around 20 of a specific currency one could read the first x pages let’s say 48 for free, after which they pay 5 cents per page. This also serves as a reader feedback system. A better system would give more information. So if the user is allowed to give a star rating per page or chapter to set the price he/she is willing to pay for it they can pay the value they feel they got out of it. This can be capped at a middle ground of overall minimal value let’s say someone gives 3 times a 1 start rating and pays 1 cent per page why would they need the 4th chapter if they don’t value it near it’s middle ground?
---- [1:33:30] Is the power to make investments and society shaping decisions spread over a net of rich people or in the hands of the state? ----
I am not certain but the state often seems to lag behind the wishes of the rich in organizational adaptation and methodology.
I think the question ties nicely back to the response of “Pricing occurs at the margins” and the printer purchase.
---- [1:38:30] Claims of systemic racism from an economic perspective or the consequences of irrational prejudice in a free market economy. ----
The standard tendency cannot objectively be checked because at the moment of appearance for the subject (let’s generalize to negative thought) one can learn to confront, observer and rationalize it’s own perspective before reacting by overthinking the situation which they have encountered from a none emotional time and position. So that the mind has already observed a baseline or a restructured response to complex situations before encountering a systemic emotional response when prompted without a precursor or expectation of that part of the self. The system will take the shortest route, unless the maintainer of the system preassigned routes to be ignored. Just like the organization of an event and the restructuring of the traffic around it. Good planning and self-reflection over time is necessary to assure the correct workings of essential systems.
---- [1:46:30] Equating value to price. Tracking liabilities and assets. ----
Without some (numerical) indicator I would indeed be very difficult unless it became was widely accepted as it would become the indicator.
---- [1:50:00] Introducing The Business cycle. ----
“Random innovation followed by selection”
“I think we can do better” but it wouldn’t be followed by throwing it out, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t in need of improvement over time. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater I guess, but sometime you need to challenge the water before you’re able to find the baby or the social utility for that matter.
If you gather a lot of data and make decisions based on probability distributions it would give range to the possibility horizon of decisions on then you are capable of making many decisions
---- [2:03:00] Confronting the possibly morally problematic idea of inherited wealth. ----
Especially in current times something to consider before extra-terrestrial colonies are on the new horizon. It’s privately owned but not achieved without the full human endeavour.
Is it not possible to make a conditional access policy based on classes of situations for long term management of wealth distribution?
---- [2:15:00] Finally finding our way to business cycle theory. ----
It seems oxymoronic if we look at nature. Anthropology shows that in certain circumstance human behaviour becomes very similar. This would create the action margin within which fluctuations are accepted before the market would gain or lose trust and buy or sell in masses.
---- [2:23:00] Looking at privatized versions of commodities formerly believed to only be possible through some form of central planning or government. Bitcoin, eBay, Uber ----
I would love seeing the privatized diversity but in the long run I would love to see them integrate each other into an organizational superstructure. Bitcoin (and variants) seems to me like Wall-Street Wall-ET edition.
---- [2:30:00] Wrapping up the episode ----
Thank you,
PS. Following one of your critiques: What would make it more romantic?
PPS. How do you manage writing multiple books? I found this already quite challenging.
Have a good day,
Rogé
View Poll
