Posted by: graemebird | April 22, 2009

Children Of A Lesser Tribe/Hyper-Spacious Land-Substitutes And Super-Abundant Energy.

We have a choice, but we have not been given a choice. Clandestine, but real and on-the-march, is the alternative of using trickery, or worse, to take away the sound of the laughter of children. from the neighbourhoods, that rich international taxeaters feel they can condescend towards. This is a a nod and a wink sort of deal. Eugenics rising to the surface after the pummeling the armies of the English-Speaking world meted our to the Nazi-faith.

Eradicate the children of lesser tribes. Thats the plan for international taxeater. Pretend that it is the low-paid family, who earns their feeble wages, in some sort of low-productivity and kleptocratic system…. Pretend that the low-paid worker and his kids, pretend that THEY are the drain on resources.

But reality says otherwise. The low-paid are no drain on resources and they represent an under-utilized resource and a great opportunity for the rest of us. Or at least the rest of us who do not now benefit from having servants about the place.

So international blugeria has turned the reality on its head. Rather than the kleptocratic taxeaters themselves being the vipers, vampires and leeches draining the life out of the rest of us. ITS POOR PEOPLE PAYING THEIR OWN WAY THAT IS ALLEGED TO BE THE PROBLEM.

I do not know of any poor person working for a dollar an hour or less who ever once stole off of me. If he did I’ll forgive him this once. It was always the taxeaters that did it, whether taxeaters of the welfare or public service variety. The latter being far and away the most expensive bludgers and the more influential as to the stealing, nature and extent.

So the idea is to shift the taint of parastism away from the bigshot civil servants and onto the under-capitalised and therefore the underpaid. You see environmentalists are all public service parasites or their stooges. They are the problem. They are the ones draining our resources. So the idea is for them to shift the blame onto the low-paid AND!!!! THEIR!!!!!! KIDS!!!!

The unreality of this implied accusation is just astonishing. Poor people who earn their way are draining the earth of sustenance in this view. BUT BIGSHOT PUBLIC SERVANTS AREN’T DRAINING THE REST OF US. Its always the bloody earth being drained. Of course it is because that powerful visual scene of the land being over-run by human rats is meant to turn your gaze away from the leech thats on your arm and the little vampire pulling blood from a vein in your forehead.

The strategy is for the taxeating bigshots, to aid these poor people in some multitude of unhelpful ways, WITH STOLEN MONEY, and then assume that this aid, GIVES THE THIEVES OF ALL PEOPLE!!!!??? the right to play Pied Piper. This is the action thats going on out there. Everyone a Pied Piper.

Don’t take the rats away. Don’t take the mosquitoes away. Don’t take the poverty away with abundant capital goods, vertical development and energy… Don’t take anything bad away at all. Just take the children away and things will be Jake. Matters will be fine in bigshot taxeater international world and its all plausible-deniability with these mega-tribal pack-animals.

Well I want to take away something. I want to take away the “semi-plausible bait” that makes people aquiese to this new-nazi-renaiisance. And so I would open up another alternative to Club-Of-Rome bedwetters and stooges. And to be fair the Club-Of-Romers do have a point insofar as we cannot guarantee liberty and sound policy and therefore cannot guarantee that their concerns can be met.

You see there is a better way. And its along that right of way down the road of economic science. Economic science with certain built-in biases. The biases are necessary because LIFE-IS-BETA and we move forward one day at a time and there is no use imagining some static-equilibrium balance. But there is more to it even than that since there are certain paradoxes involved with the supply of land, and certain idiosyncratic differences between energy-economics and the production of other goods.


Graeme Bird April 23rd, 2009 at 8:32 am

“Because of (1) we can say that it is within human rights boundries to have 2 children.
Because of (2) a third child will be consuming energy that should be saved for another family’s two children.”

No we aren’t going to be rationing children, energy or anything else and you can come out from under your Muslim cover with that hateful jive. The pro-abortion mantra is out there; “my body my choice” and all that rote-learned stuff. Its a decoy to fool our girls as to where the real violation to their liberty and person lies.

The real violation by the state comes, not from preventing late-term killing of healthy children but rather from busy-bodies or governments trying to ration kids. And using any amount of violence, trickery, psychological blackmail and just plain persuasion to achieve this.

Instead of the Doctor making a house-call to see your pregnant aunty then its the forced abortion team. Or people slip anti-fertility drugs in along with the vaccines so that black people will lose their children. Or the environmentalist doctor talks the lady out of the pregnancy. Perhaps claiming that it will endanger her health. Or lying and saying that the child itself is not healthy. This sort of thing is the ultimate crime along with the late late late-term abortion via bureaucratising centrally, how Malaria will be dealt with.

The answer is not environmentalist murder trickery and hectoring, but rather economic science. With a special emphasis on land-substitutes. Land-substitutes and access to energy. Hyper-abundant energy. As a responsible country Australia ought to aim at producing, consuming and exporting more energy per capita then any other country and no-one coming close. Being without peer in energy production, consumption and export.

As far as the land substitution is concerned, this means putting together the overall legal and tax basis which allows a more or less permanent surplus of specifically high-rise living and working space (and multi-level basements too). HYPER-SPACIOUS high-rise living and working space. 12 foot ceiling minimums. Giant rooms. Not apartments but SKY HOUSES.

Ziggurat-style buildings that straddle the roads. What is the legal framework that would make such investments and projects doable? Not by crony-town but as a natural way of putting together an investment with even a collection of mom-and-pop types? What legal framework do we need to “homestead” the space that lies above the roads? We are light-years away from this sort of thing. And there is a very good reason why we have not progressed in this direction.

We need to be able to discuss important matters with the air clear of leftists, globalists and environmentalists lying relentlessly, round the clock, world without end. If lying is no longer fashionable, or indeed acceptable, we can get it together to solve all these problems.

“High-density” is an ugly phrase. This is in no way what I’m talking about. If we wind up with 14 billion people in the world, all these people cannot rightly aspire to the Australian idea of a quarter-acre block. Or the Classical Greek norm of a hoplite with ten acres of land in Attica.

But each and every one of these hypothetical 14 billion people can potentially, under economic science and abundant energy, aspire to a half acre sky-house with 12 foot ceilings. Its entirely doable and I think people have the right to be able to expect such a thing down the track.

The more people that choose this sort of (what by todays standards would be) astonishing luxury then the more chance there is for anyone who wants to ride his horse out of town and rope off ten acres for himself… well there would be more opportunity for that other extreme also.

So there is never any need to ration kids, energy or anything else. The idea is simply to follow economic science and science more generally. With vertical development land substitutes totally overmatching any actual increase in population, matters will be able to progress along the following lines.

1. At first the non-agricultural land use per capita can start coming down, even as the volume of living and working space per capita grows at a very fast clip.

2. Then the non-agricultural area used by humans IN TOTAL can even start falling, but with volume per capita still expanding very fast.

3. Then even the agricultural-space PLUS non-agricultural area being used by humans can begin to fall, AND STILL WITH per capita volume of living and working space expanding unimpeded.

This is what we want. We don’t want parasitical lunatics like Luke getting a warm inner glow knowing his rich white international taxeater brethren are using every conceivable cunning to eradicate the children of other tribes. This Club Of Rome nightmare of the exponential series can be over-matched by human reason but the pre-requisite is we have to stop tolerating people lying all the time.

Its not funny anymore.

Vertical Development In The Form Of Basements And Underground Infrastructure Is Of Particular Importance.

Vertical Development In The Form Of Basements And Underground Infrastructure Is Of Particular Importance.



  1. have you seen this?

  2. No but looking at the title I see that I’m miles ahead of this fellow.

    But its not just skyscrapers. The skyscrapers we have not arean’t sufficient for industrial production. And pluse they appear somewhat flimsy and how would things go under extended, indeed yeasr-long nuclear war?

  3. What nuclear war might that be, you dope?




  4. I’m just besides myself in wonderment thinking what an idiot the person must have been who asked this question.

    What sort of answer could you give someone this thick?

    AND EXTENDED nuclear war thicko. What could you have possibly meant by your question?

    We find this everywhere these days. People just basically so fucking stupid they don’t know how to ask a question if they don’t know something.

    What might you say by way of answer? The 50 years augmented Pelopennesian war of 2209-2260.

    I must apologise to my readers because the fact is we get just so many blockheads showing up here.


  6. When you’re talking about buildings able to withstand prolonged nuclear war economic unfeasability is exactly what you’re yapping about.

  7. No I’m not. Buildings with basements and in the ziggurat style, for the most part, would be far more economic and far easier to hold up to nuclear war which could last many years.

    If you own a house and your own land you are always ten feet from safety against nukes. ten feet underground and some various preparations is all it takes.

    We don’t have a stockpile of nuclear weapons. Its conceivable that we might have to make them on the fly. And we ought to start thinking of all the implications of this.

    Our tall skinny skyscrapers are really uneconomic and they are weak as well. The would be death-traps in nuclear war.

  8. Interesting idea, spreading out the CBD area. There’s also the benefit of improved transport to work during peak hour, which may have a positive psychological effect when more time is spent with friends, family rather than in traffic or overcrowded trains. This in turn could help change the dominant philosophical trend of pessimistic chic-ism. And a return to a system where welfare can enable the feeling of achievement within an individual.
    Would small office buildings help us in returning to a manufacturing economy? If we’re spreading out admin/office buildings over land, won’t that force up the price of Manufacturing/agricultural land? And how much administration work output is part of a service economy cycle as opposed to admin/logistics output need to support wealth creation?

  9. Right, basements. Worth looking into.

  10. I just think vertical development in general. Also this fetish with basements. Well we have to be able to cope with nuclear intimidation. Which means that we have to be able to cope with nuclear attack itself. The Americans cannot be relied upon anymore. The leadership are crazy and they don’t have the resources in any case.

    If there was success with freeing up more vertical development I don’t know whether it would necessarily mean the extension of the CBD or it might mean the CBD’s of formerly small towns being built up. Here is where the ambiguous problem of road-charging comes up.

    If you could get rid of just about every other tax for motorists raise the tax free threshold, get rid of company tax etc etc then congestion charge economically might make sense. And one could see how it might affect the city/country balance and the design of cities under conditions of non-zoning.

    Well thats the possible economic side. But politically you can imagine that as being the ultimate disaster. The ultimate way for the state to control and snoop on people. Or alternatively just giving the thieves and Sado-Pigovians one more way to destroy us.

    But there is a big problem with socialist road provision. Since you build a big road, that takes up land, you force people out to the outer suburbs, they need to drive more, and the roads become clogged again. And I think all this socialist road provision tends to make for an ugly city. Some folks come out in favour of public versus private transport. But thats a bit of a furphie since the way things are now its all socialist.

    Its very hard to know what to advocate here. Because we are dealing with real vipers but it is worth thinking about how things would be if we had confidence in our administrators and they were ruthless in cutting spending. And THEN they moved the tax burden to congestion taxes. Then you’d likely get this highrise business but not likely just an extension of the CBD but a more logistically sound setup. Where you might look around you and the place looks like Gotham city and then you walk two blocks and already you are out to the semi-rural districts.

  11. Just circling back to another topic. Just monitoring Catallaxy as I do from time to time. You look at Kodjo and Adrien and just how appalling these people are from a logical point of view. But when you consider that Kodjo is a wicked leftist and Adrien is some sort of social misfit cable-guy type and fundamentally a fascist well there is some strategic significance to their incredible stupidity.

    Actually going so far as to argue that torture TORTURE!!! is in and of itself not effective, a totally ludicrous notion, puts a Catholic intellectual like CL, or someone who usually concurs with him, like myself, in this odd and unnatural position of seeming on the surface of things to be defending torture. Just by way of opposing their utter idiocy.

    Look Kodjo. Believe me if I have access to this sort nasty methodologies and you are holding out on stuff that I need to know you ARE going to give that information up. What the hell are you talking about man?

    Just stop talking rubbish. We need better justifications than THAT to limit or eliminate torture and particularly we need to eliminate the plausibility or felt-need for torture by a change of strategy.

    Kodjo and Adrien are actively promoting torture is what they are doing. By using the most idiotic argument against torture and ignoring the more systemic reasons as to why you have to find a way not to need it.

  12. An undeniably strong point on the Usurpers document fraud:

    “The only evidence of Obama being born in Hawaii are the COLB shown on the net and birth announcements. Both have been found to be forged, or unreliable. He has not even offered the receipt to prove that he asked the state of Hawaii for that copy that he offers as proof that he was born there, and there are at least three different copies of that COLB on the net. they can’t all be the real one. There is the one with the blacked out serial number, one showing the serial number, one with one fold, one with two folds, one without a seal, one with a seal.”

    Lets pull out the best part of it again:

    “…..three different copies of that COLB on the net. they can’t all be the real one. There is the one with the blacked out serial number, one showing the serial number, one with one fold, one with two folds, one without a seal, one with a seal.”

    There is just no getting around this fact. Some of the kids at Catallaxy don’t know what facts are. Or reasoning or anything else when it comes down to it.

    What is their argument? They are arguing to NOT FIND OUT FOR SURE. But never have they made a valid argument for NOT FINDING OUT FOR SURE.

    You stupid degenerate unevolved motherless monkeys. You are going to destroy civilisation itself and most humans now alive if you cannot spontaneously innovate a grown-up humans brains.

    Mass-sackings of public servants is the only thing we can put our faith in.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: