Sunday, May 28, 2017

[THE UNTITLED MAGNUM OPUS] CHAPTER ON THE SUBJECT OF REACTIONARY CAPITALSIM, PART 2


Contents



[THE UNTITLED MAGNUM OPUS]


 CHAPTER 
ON THE SUBJECT OF REACTIONARY CAPITALISM,
PART 2



Component # 5, The Zoning Market

Normally, zoning laws are made by a city government under the influence and pressure of commercial interests. The result is a restriction on growth that artificially inflates the price of home ownership for the profit of home owners and increased expense of renters. This represents a de facto transfer of wealth from renters to home owners. Because the transfer of wealth is profitable to one group in a democracy, a feedback loop is created between the municipal government and home owners where the property owners pressure local governments to provide more profitable restrictions, and the municipal government provides those restrictions in order to win reelection by appealing to the interests of a vocal constituency. This is a "votes for growth restrictions" loop of mutual payoff. One party provides votes to the other, while the other party provides profitable housing inflation to the one. The cycle then feeds on itself and real estate prices explode, forcing the poor out of the city and generating homelessness. Within a democracy this becomes the true purpose of green belts, zoning laws, and height restrictions. They are all economic rent machines for client populations.

Since elected officials depend on votes and financial sponsorship for gaining power, a potential always exists for a group to receive economic rents in exchange for dedicated support. This effectively turns democracy into a coercion market where the violence of the state is purchased by private actors for their profit — and against their competition. This process then grows relentlessly, and the state along with it, in a feedback loop until the economy is destroyed. At which point democracy is transformed into some form of feudalism, or communism (they are almost identical in practice). The spoils system was an easily example of paying off constituents with government jobs. It has since been replaced with a sponsorship model where campaign contributions are traded for regulatory corruption, or where votes are traded for handouts, affirmative action job quotas, etc.

The whole point of Comprehensive Market Formalism is to subordinate as many state functions to the market as possible. The purpose of this is allow the executive to conquer his own bureaucracy. Every state bureaucracy is a parasite. All parasites seek to grow, and everything that is not forced to compete for its survival inevitably forms a feedback loop with the state that induces state growth. State growth has killed every past civilization by expanding its tax base beyond what the economy can sustain.

This brings us finally to the issue of zoning, because a state needs to keep an explosive factory from locating itself next to a school, or prevent a smelly rendering plant from being upwind of a suburban community, and needs to do this without corruption. The very act of zoning provides an opportunity for economic rents, and the principle–agent problem means that the executive agent may act according to his own profit rather than the executive interest. An agent in an illiberal state may take bribes, which is the non-democracy version of campaign contributions. How to solve both? How do we prevent this from becoming a source of economic rents? Convert it into a market.

The municipal government issues zoning restriction certificates. These are simply given away to the renters in the community. They are a collection of building rules. One certificate may be a height restriction, say another prohibits building an industrial facility within a quarter mile. The poor are given these certificates on a one-time basis. Any new certificates are sold at auction. The poor can then sell these certificates to private parties that are interested in keeping industrial businesses out of their neighborhoods, maintaining a view of the mountains, or whatever. Private non-profits can gather the certificates up to form preservation trusts for views, scenery, historic preservation, or whatever. The entire business of maintaining good neighborhoods is privatized, and renters receive compensation for increased housing costs at market rates. The feedback loop of rent seeking is cut.

Certificates are standardized. Every restriction certificate covers a set area of say 1 kilometer width and 1 kilometer length. A certificate holder attaches his certificate to a spatial grid point defined by latitude and longitude. He registers this information with a centralized software system open to public scrutiny. The first to file is first to have his rights enforced. Registration is mandatory for enforcement of whatever development and use restrictions the certificate places on a parcel. Some certificates supersede others depending on the rules of each. Software keeps track of it all on a digital map updated in real time. There are also rights certificates that prevent a restriction from being placed on a property during building so that the developer can have certainty that he will be able complete his project. All of the rules regarding whose cert trumps whose are specified in the certificates themselves.




Component # 6, The Executive Compensation System

Accumulations of wealth pose a threat to the executive of the Executive Licensing Corporation, and its owners. Centers of wealth might attempt to purchase influence. An integral part of ensuring stability is to reduce all competing power centers to an equal state of total subordination. As a result, the ELA practices remarkably "progressive" politics in certain precise ways. Liberalism is a weapon against competing power centers. The mode of ensuring total hegemony is a never ending class war against all potential rival power centers. "Democracy for thee, and not for me." This is done through democracy in all rival power centers, socialism in all rival economic centers, mutualism in manufacturing, competition between firms, competition between rights enforcement agencies, competition between bureaucracies, and the "voucherization or everything." The reason the ELA presides over a market in governance is because competition is a method of reducing rivals by stripping their profits to the bare minimum. Part of this is bringing socialism into the workplace. Bosses determine the pay of workers. Workers determine the pay of bosses. Quite naturally this reduces executive compensation, and thus, accumulations of potentially threatening wealth. There are two possible methods.




Method 1

Executives and workers are divided unto two classes. Persons classified as "executives" run the company and may not comprise less than 1% or more than 20% of its staff.

Each executive is given several votes that may determine the compensation of a worker within the company. Each employee is given a single vote, that when combined with votes of other people to reach a quota, may determine the pay of a single executive. The quota is determined as the number of workers divided by the number of executives. During the yearly time of negotiation no new employees or executives may be hired until all negotiations are concluded or a week has passed, whichever is less. Negotiations must conclude before the end of a week, or are forfeit for the year. All employees and executives who fail to conclude negotiations by the end of the week stay at their current previously negotiated rates x 90%. for employees and 50% for executives.

Method 2

All non-executive jobs within companies are titles to be purchased within the market. The market sells jobs in bundles to union workers. However, titles are purchased in bundles by the unions who collectively own the exchange. Only unions may own job title exchanges. The unions negotiate the pay and benefits of workers within their bundles of workers. Each bundle must have a minimum of 100,000 workers. The union broker is paid a percentage of the total benefits compensation that he negotiates.

All executive titles are sold directly to market and must be the 1 % top ranking positions in the firm, no more, no less. Only up to 3 % of titles listed on the exchange may be executive.

Regardless of the method used, the negotiation between the two classes reaches a market equilibrium which raises the pay of workers above what it currently is, and lowers the pay of executives below what it currently is. The resulting greater equality reduces the threat to executive power that hordes of wealth could create.



Component # 7, The Reproduction Licensing Market


In a world that is over-populated reproduction violates the non-aggression principle. The source of this violation is two-fold: first, the Earth has finite resources and human beings cannot grow forever. The background extinction rate has been raised dramatically and if it continues it will eventually threaten all human life. Secondly, children have rights. A pedophile, alcoholic, drug addict, or schizophrenic, is simply incapable of raising a child without abusing or neglecting them. The mere presence of such an influence in a child's life is abusive. Thus, all reproduction involves two potential acts of aggression; an aggression against the resources of the planet, and thus, other humans on the planet who depend of those resources, and two, a potential aggression against the child born. Addicts and pederasts cannot have a right to have children. That is just a de facto right to abuse.

Thirdly, reproduction may involve the aggression of the less civilized against the more civilized, since the less civilized pass on their genes, and their propagation lowers quality of life even for them. The very act of an uncivilized person reproducing is an act of violence against society. The non-aggression principle starts with genetics.

The truly libertarian state has a moral obligation to screen potential parents in order to safeguard the NAP. Some may claim that the state itself is a violation of the NAP. We may even grant this concession. But we do not live in a perfect world. Aggression must be reduced to its absolute minimum level, and that requires the lesser aggression of the state in order to prevent the greater aggression that would occur under pure anarchy. It also requires a reproductive licensing regime.

The number of individuals in utilitarian terms who are aggressed against is not the issue. Taxation is a small aggression that causes no real trauma as long as the taxes are not onerous. Child molestation and neglect are far greater traumas. Thus, the measurement of aggression is not strictly a utilitarian numbers game: the severity of the abuse must be taken into account, and it is far preferable to make many people experience the small stress of seeking licences to have children, than let one child experience the abuse of a molester, even if the application process requires an invasive inconvenience, such as an an FMRI brain scan to detect sexual attraction to children.

There are three forms of violation of the NAP where reproduction is concerned; barbarian reproduction, environmental destruction, and unfit parents. We have the possibility address all of these concerns, serving justice, humanity, and the environment.

Since racial conflict is an ever present danger, no international system of reproductive licencing will do. Since the politics of such a system would favor the barbarians over the civilized, a licencing system must be administered by a single race for its own benefit within its own territory, and it must have solid control over that territory. Other groups can get their own systems, or a majority race can tolerate a minority within its territory operating under its rules.

Reproductive licencing serves three purposes in accordance with the three concerns we already discussed;

1. Eliminating the fecundity of destructive populations.
2. Conserving the environment.
3. Preventing child abuse.

Everything is about formalism. We want to turn everything into a game, into a system. We are tired of politics. Let the market decide it all. Inshallah. Even your ability to have children will be determined by capitalism.

Formalism is the act of placing a sphere of human activity within a framework of legal and market activity, by creating formalized procedures for its behavior. Formalism turns areas of conflict into non-violent games. Race, ethnic conflict, religious conflict, and values conflict, are massive areas of human behavior in need of formalization. We already formalized racial, ethnic, religious, and values conflict with the identity easement market. The identity easement mechanism creates a way for groups to carve out spaces for themselves in the realm of real estate. It is spacial in nature. This is genetic.

Total capitalism brings all aspects of human nature into capitalism. Everything that humans do is absorbed into its market structure. The reproduction licensing market will formalize capitalism in reproduction. This is necessary because there is a problem of growth, and the inevitable conflicts that growth produces. Because if low IQ people are allowed to reproduce exponentially, eventually their sheer numbers will destroy capitalism.

The cost of an individual is charged to the licensing market. The taxes paid are credited to them. The balance determines the cost of a license. If the individual is a liability to society they have to pay the market to reproduce. If they are an asset the market pays them.




Component # 8. The Patriarchal Welfare State

There is a level of government defined in terms of genetics rather than land territory. It is the Patriarchal level, and just like the county, municipal, state, or federal levels, it performs a certain function and only that function: it administers the welfare state, and collects all taxes related to it.
The Patriarchal, (a literal government defined in genetic information space rather than territory), collects all welfare state taxes for women, children, and matters related to families. It distributes all benefits related to women and children. It decides all matters related to alimony, child support, and divorce. When a woman marries a man she marries into his sexual government. His last name is his government. It may tax him and distribute benefits to her. Only her husband and other men with the same Y chromosome can serve on his genetic governing council.

Since only males may serve on the government, it may appear at first glance that this gives a raw deal to women. A bunch of men are going to determine what benefits she gets? If any? But keep in mind that these governments are last names, and not territories. All last names are in competition with each other to provide benefits. In other words, all men who share a last name are in competition with all other last named men to provide benefits to women. While the men in a patriarchy may determine the benefits to women, it is the market equilibrium which will tend to determine which last names succeed in attracting wives. Thus, if a last name is stingy it will have trouble finding a wife. Conversely, if a last name is generous in the wrong ways, it may encourage divorce. Thus, the market equilibrium ultimately favors those Family Governments that maximize reproduction, and configure all rules related to divorce, alimony, child support, maternity care, child care, welfare, (if any) to favor successful marriages in the long-term.

In the short-term it may reward profligacy and excessive generosity to wives. Thus, there is a constitutional/federal level to the federation of Last Name Governments. At this level there is a constitution, (a set of market rules), which limit competition, and limit compensation. The Family governments may compete for wives locally, but they cooperate/collude to limit competition and benefits federally.

All males who share the same last name vote for a council that sets tax rates and distributes benefits.
Males whose fathers were cuckolds are excluded from membership in the last name of their Last Name government, since they do not share the same Y chromosome as their fathers. A male without a Family government has no welfare state taxes to pay, or benefits to give a potential wife. As the legal son of a cuckold, his classified as a legal bastard.

He may make application to join his genetic fathers family. If they accept him then, he is adopted into that family instead. A Federal Patriarchal Constitution may force him to join his genetic fathers family, or at least force him to pay taxes to either his cucks Last Name Government or his genetic Last Name Government. The man must change his last name to the name of his biological father. There will be a Y chromosome registry that can be used to identify who that man is.

In conclusion, all surnames compete to give benefits to wives while colluding to limit the cost of those benefits in  total. Benefit types evolve under market mechanisms to reward those that reproduce and punish those systems that do not. Last Name Governments borrow new tricks developed by other governments, and the market develops into an efficient mechanism for producing children.

There is also an average cash limit and it is determined by direct democracy of all males, and only males, regardless of last name. There is a ballot. On the ballot is a series of cash limits determined in $250.00 increments. The highest vote-getter price point determines the cash limit of all welfare states administered by all Last Name Governments. Two price points are listed above the average, and two below, on the ballot. Let us say the average is 1250 in benefits per year, per male. Then the ballot looks like this;

A: 1750 limit
B: 1500 limit
D: 1250 limit
E: 1000 limit
F: 750 limit

A plurality of males can then raise or lower the limit for annual benefits every year. However, the number of votes each male gets is equal to the number of children he has. As a result, marred men with children determine the outcome of every price point, and the vote is always biased in favor of men with big families.


Part 3
Contents


No comments:

Post a Comment