Putting Your Money Where Your Mouth Is

[Xerographica]

Last month I spent $100 dollars to boost this facebook post. Here's the bang I got for my $100 bucks...

Reach: 3,075 people
Post Likes: 126
Link Clicks: 2
Page Likes: 7

Here was my target audience...

Age: 30-50
Gender: Male
Interest: Adam Smith, Libertarianism, Free market or Economics
Location: United States

Here's the relevant economic concept...

The market price of every particular commodity is regulated by the proportion between the quantity which is actually brought to market, and the demand of those who are willing to pay the natural price of the commodity, or the whole value of the rent, labour, and profit, which must be paid in order to bring it thither. Such people may be called the effectual demanders, and their demand the effectual demand; since it may be sufficient to effectuate the bringing of the commodity to market. It is different from the absolute demand. A very poor man may be said in some sense to have a demand for a coach and six; he might like to have it; but his demand is not an effectual demand, as the commodity can never be brought to market in order to satisfy it. - Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations

We all really want something to be brought "thither". But this something isn't a physical commodity/product... it's freedom. Even though freedom isn't a physical product... the same rule applies. The more money that's spent to bring freedom thither... the more freedom that will be brought thither.

The challenge is that we all want to have our cake and eat it too. You would like to keep your money and have your freedom. I'm in the same boat! We're all in the same boat. Which is a problem because, unless we spend our money... we're not going to get something that we all really want!

In other words... we're not going to make any real progress until we face the fact that the free-rider problem is a real problem.

Does the free-rider problem always have to be solved with coercion? NO!!!!

Let's take this forum for example. I use this forum and benefit from this forum but I've never once given Bryan any money to support this forum. Does this make me a free-rider? In my book it does. Sure, Bryan could try and solve the free-rider problem by creating a paywall. Then, the only way that I could participate on this forum would be if I paid say $5 dollars a month. Would I be willing to pay $5 dollars a month to participate on this forum? Errr... not sure. But I'd certainly be happy to pay $1 dollar a month to participate on this forum. So why don't I voluntarily do so? Because I want to have my cake and eat it too.

Another possible solution to the free-rider problem would be for Bryan to sweeten the deal. I'd sure be happy to voluntarily pay $1 dollar a month if Bryan placed a large banner ad for my blog at the top of every page on this website! I'm guessing that it would send quite a bit of traffic to my blog... so it would be a pretty sweet deal for me. Would it be a sweet deal for Bryan as well? Maybe not?

Perhaps a better solution would be for Bryan to create a page that lists...

1. donors
2. the total amount that they've donated
3. a link to their website

This list would be sorted by total donation. So the more you donate.... the higher up on the page the link to your website... and the more traffic your website would receive. And perhaps the websites of the top 5 donors could be listed on this website's homepage.

I'm not saying that this would perfectly solve the free-rider problem. But clearly it would provide more incentive to contribute. And it definitely wouldn't involve any coercion.

Let's review...

1. Spending is required to bring freedom thither
2. Everybody wants to have their cake and eat it too
3. Incentives matter

Even if you disagree with the second premise... hopefully you should agree with the first and third premise. You should agree that it's necessary to try and maximize the incentive to contribute.

Ok, so yeah, I spent $100 dollars to try and bring freedom thither. And perhaps you don't necessarily understand or agree with the message that I spent $100 dollars to boost... but please try and pretend that it was a message that you do thoroughly understand and agree with. Please pretend that you did benefit from my sacrifice. Then try and figure out what would incentivize you to chip in to help share my sacrifice. What would motivate you to help me bear the burden of my boost? What would encourage you to paypal me $1 dollar?

Imagine a subreddit where I could share the link to the facebook post that I boosted. If you liked my sacrifice... then you could vote my link up. If you disliked my sacrifice... then you could vote my link down. With this sub... the most popular sacrifices would get the most exposure/attention/accolades/discussion/scrutiny.

If such a sub existed... would you be more inclined to chip in to bring freedom thither? If not, then can you think of another type of system that would maximize your incentive to contribute? If you were going to create a website with the goal of maximizing people's incentive to contribute... how would you structure your website?

Here are a couple messages that I'd also like to boost...

Public services are never better performed than when their reward comes only in consequence of their being performed, and is proportioned to the diligence employed in performing them. - Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations

Individual decision making is closely connected to creativity not because all choices are excellent, but because they constitute a broad field out of which the best responses can emerge. If we wished to establish a connection to Darwinian ideas, we could say that the wide spectrum of decisions is similar to the field of the spontaneous variations of living things from which the pressure of natural selection preserves only the most apt. Without such experimental structures and behaviours, responses remain stagnant and life sinks under the weight of institutionalised routine. Freedom multiplies actions and ideas, some of which turn out to be brilliant and others fundamentally flawed. The important fact, however, is that few if any of them could have occurred under conditions of enforced conformity. To leave people alone with their projects is to permit - even to encourage - the exercise of private imaginations. - John Lachs

I'm willing to spend $10 dollars to boost the first and $5 dollars to boost the second. How much money would you be wiling to paypal me to help boost these messages?

What are the top three messages that you would be wiling to spend the most money to boost on Facebook? How much money would you be willing to spend to boost them?

[Ronin Truth]

It's really hard to talk, eat and drink that way.

[Son_of_Liberty90]

How did you boost a post with money?

[bunklocoempire]

Is boosting a post like advertising? So that's what the kids are calling it...

[Zippyjuan]

Boosting use to mean stealing.

[RonPaulIsGreat]

I'm really not understanding this, so you paid so 3000 people would see a post, and 2 clicked a link and that cost you a 100 bucks.... HHMMMM, and this is a plan for what?

[Xerographica]

I'm really not understanding this, so you paid so 3000 people would see a post, and 2 clicked a link and that cost you a 100 bucks.... HHMMMM, and this is a plan for what?

Would you have understood it any better if I had spent $100 dollars to put the same message on a billboard?

I said how I spent my money to promote freedom. Now it's your turn. Kinda like kiss and tell... but spend and tell.

[Jamesiv1]

// lol

[pcosmar]

1. Spending is required to bring freedom thither

True

But not with phony money (FRNs),, but with the very real blood of tyrants,, Patriots are already spending theirs.

[RonPaulIsGreat]

Would you have understood it any better if I had spent $100 dollars to put the same message on a billboard?

I said how I spent my money to promote freedom. Now it's your turn. Kinda like kiss and tell... but spend and tell.

Edited, think I probably was to harsh, still don't agree with spending money on enticing people to freedom.

Here's the thing we could very easily have a lot more freedom TODAY, than we have even without ever recruiting another person to the cause via expense. How?????

Well, all power manifests itself in Money really. We have cryptocurrency, which technically can't be controlled by government. Just a few days ago OpenBazaar launched which is a decentralized marketplace. So, we have "money", and a place to exchange out of the hands of .gov or large corps. Well that's the essential components to start civilization with. So, imagine, if all of us, simply, listed stuff for sale and purchased things without any government controlled aspect to the system. Bitcoin(currently only supported crypto, but I think they said more to come) would grow, more people would use it and want it, the less power .gov would have, etc.... and the harder it would be to shut down. Then people after using it will say, why again do we need government to be involved in money at all? Oh wow, now just by using the system, they acquire proof that the government isn't needed at all for society to function at least in that segment, they could not be convinced otherwise once experiencing the truth of the situation personally. There are no fees on openbazaar thus why if it grows, even those initially neutral or pro-gov money would use it, as they'd make more money using it selling the same product for the same price, or they could split the difference and sell it slightly cheaper and make slightly more.

Anyway, that's just one thing. OpenBazaar just launched of course and is still a bit clunky.

So, I guess, I'll be selling off these dvd's I never watch on the decentralized marketplace for Magic Internet money only. That's my contribution in the next week. Maybe sell this extra Raspberry pi 2 I got, but never used. Stuff like that, and will look there first for stuff to buy as opposed to ebay.

[jmdrake]

So the big idea that you are pushing is that people should be able to allocate where their taxes go? I like that idea. Something I came up with even before my political awakening.

[Xerographica]

No thanks, I'm not enriching zuckerturd, and IMO, all the people interested in "freedom" already know about it, it's just not popular with the whores, manginas, femininazis, warmongers, welfare kings and queens, the military, and all government employees as in 90%+ of the US population reject "freedom". Save your cash, the masses hate your ideas, no need to spend money on an ad campaign they'll laugh at.

A while back I attached an orchid to a tree. The orchid had a couple seed pods (aka "fruit") on it. A few days later I noticed that the fruit had been eaten. Probably by some rat. What if the rat had also eaten the roots of the orchid? Then the orchid wouldn't grow... and if it didn't grow then it wouldn't flower... and if it didn't flower... then it wouldn't bear fruit.

If I found the rat I could say, "Hey rat, you're really not doing yourself any favors by eating the roots of the orchid that produces the fruit that you eat." But I'm pretty sure that the rat wouldn't understand me. Even if I drew it a diagram.

In case you missed the analogy... rats are the voters. Democracy allows them to eat the source of our prosperity. Democracy allows them to eat the hand that feeds them. But, unlike rats, the average human is smart enough to understand how their behavior harms their interests. We just need to do a better job of enlightening them.

Democracy asks people whether they want drugs to be illegal and voila! Here we are.

1. The war on drugs uses resources (duh)
2. These resources could have been used for other things (duh)
3. These resources could have been used for more valuable things (duh?)

The war on drugs obviously has a price tag. Everything has a price tag. But democracy never shows voters the price tag. If the voters could clearly see what the war on drugs would personally cost them... then they probably wouldn't vote for the war on drugs.

The thing is... democracy can never show voters the price tag. The price tag is always determined after the fact. Voters decide that they want the war on drugs... and congress decides the price that people will pay for the war on drugs.

Voters can certainly see all the money being spent on the war on drugs. But they can never see where the money would have been spent if it hadn't been spent on the war on drugs.

The average person is smart enough to understand this concept. But have you ever endeavored to explain this concept to anybody? Nope. You haven't. Yet, here you are arguing that the masses reject freedom.

Do you like my analogy of the rat and the orchid? Honestly it's the best analogy that I could think of. I like it better than my Batman vs Hitler analogy. The question is... why am I having to think of a good analogy? How come a good analogy doesn't already exist?

Go out and preach my rat and orchid analogy to the masses. And if they reject it... don't blame them. Blame the analogy. Blame me and all the other people who do understand the inherent problem with democracy.