$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('John Galt', '&')quot;The political system we will build is contained in a single moral premise: no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force,"
PeakOil is You
Atlas Shrugged
Re: Atlas Shrugged
by rangerone314 » Fri 11 Dec 2009, 10:48:51
Those who support libertarianism and laissez-faire economics seem to overlook the fact that corporations can have as much power as, and function like, governments.
I wonder how quasi-governments like HomeOwnersAssociations and CreditBureaus figure into Ayn Rand. Big Business is every bit as bad as Big Government and every bit as intrusive into the lives of ordinary people. In this country at least, it is hard to function without interacting with Big Business in someway.
The theory of laissez-faire capitalism is that humans as a rule are lazy, no good and untrustworthy, and need market incentives to be productive.
The theory of libertarianism is that you don't need government to regulate people or businesses because the wealthy and corporations are hardworking, good and trustworthy.
LOL, no cognitive dissonance there.
Its good to support mob-rule-economics where people make "rational" decisions in the market place by "voting" with their dollars, but "mob-rule" direct democracy is a non-starter because you can't trust those same people to make rational decisions in the voting booth.
LOL, no cognitive dissonance there, either.
By supporting laissez-faire capitalism, libertarians are demonstrating that they are merely providing ideological cover for people with money and power to do as they please. Intellectual puppets for the rich. Must be fun to have billions of dollars and delusions of persecution. Then again megalomania, narcissism, paranoia and greed are frequent travelling companions.
I wonder what Ayn Rand had to say about "The Tragedy of the Commons" or externalizing costs. Someone should have built a toxic smoke spewing factory next to her house and catapulted toxic waste into her yard and pumped MTBE into the local groundwater if she had a well.
Even the title "Atlas Shrugged" and its usage in book demonstrates arrogance and delusions of mythological grandeur. So heroic, if John Galt and compatriots were real, they'd probably cr@p marble.
Essentially decent science fiction though, a good read back when I was in 4th grade, but get more out of stuff like "A Boy and His Dog" or "The Number of the Beast" now.
An ideology is by definition not a search for TRUTH-but a search for PROOF that its point of view is right
Equals barter and negotiate-people with power just take
You cant defend freedom by eliminating it-unknown
Our elected reps should wear sponsor patches on their suits so we know who they represent-like Nascar-Roy
Equals barter and negotiate-people with power just take
You cant defend freedom by eliminating it-unknown
Our elected reps should wear sponsor patches on their suits so we know who they represent-like Nascar-Roy
-
rangerone314 - Light Sweet Crude
- Posts: 4105
- Joined: Wed 03 Dec 2008, 04:00:00
- Location: Maryland
Re: Atlas Shrugged
by Plantagenet » Fri 11 Dec 2009, 12:23:12
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ian807', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Plantagenet', 'O')bama's giant porkulus bill .
Excuse me, but isn't the current budget still a legacy of the last administration.
Hi ian807:
The answer to your question is clearly no. Obama added immensely to the spending and Obama created the vast majority of the current huge budget deficit.
For instance, Obama and democrats passed a porkulus bill (also called a stimulus bill) in January for 800 BILLION dollars. Obama and the democrats also passed a "supplemental" budget in January to add 300 BILLION DOLLARS for government agencies to spend, and Obama passed another supplemental budget for 100 BILLION to pay for his first surge in Afghanistan (Obama sent 23,000 more troops there in March with the money from his supplemental military budget).
Just these three bills requested by Obama produced another 1.2 TRILLION dollars of government spending, close to the entire 1.4 TRILLION federal deficit Obama produced. If Obama hadn't added the new spending, the 2009 deficit would have been "only" about 200 BILLION.
Surely Obama should be held responsible for the spending that he dreamed up, he pushed through Congress and he actually did?
-
Plantagenet - Expert
- Posts: 26765
- Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
- Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).
Re: Atlas Shrugged
by Ainan » Fri 11 Dec 2009, 16:12:34
Good question TreeFarmer. +1
I read Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged about a year ago in a snowy German forest. It did take 3 days mind, tis a big book. I agree with many of her points. But as stated by Jenab6 (Anyone remember him?) on his blog, her philosophy only works for the founders of a business. The engineers and businessmen working from a garden shed, the rags to riches story. A corporation is a different entity. I'd like to point out so many of the big name corporations that dominate the world are several decades or over a century old. The people that founded them are long dead. The people that run them are people who hold MBAs. You don't get an MBA unless you intend to run someone elses business to make money for yourself. I've never heard anyone say 'I want to produce more wealth for the country, so I'm going to get an MBA'. MBAs have exploded in popularity in the last 30 years to enable people to loot the west. Why do MBAs make more than Engineers, Scientists, Farmers and so forth? They are not uniquely enlightened if you ask me. George Carlin had some good stuff to say about this.
The second point Rand overlooked is morality. Her characters would be considered very moral to most people. I won't devlve into objectivism but they all valued wealth and the fair exchange of wealth by means of money. No stealing, fair exchange. If everyone was an objectivist this might work, but they're not. There's another moral code in this world that many people entertain but few practice which once held capitalism in check by self restraining individuals with great power. I'm talking about Christianity. I don't think any real Christian theologist would disagree that the bailouts infringe on the commandment 'thou shall not steal'. Capitalism should be a tool used by free people to provide for themselves, their familys and community, not an end unto itself as Rand seemed to think.
I read Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged about a year ago in a snowy German forest. It did take 3 days mind, tis a big book. I agree with many of her points. But as stated by Jenab6 (Anyone remember him?) on his blog, her philosophy only works for the founders of a business. The engineers and businessmen working from a garden shed, the rags to riches story. A corporation is a different entity. I'd like to point out so many of the big name corporations that dominate the world are several decades or over a century old. The people that founded them are long dead. The people that run them are people who hold MBAs. You don't get an MBA unless you intend to run someone elses business to make money for yourself. I've never heard anyone say 'I want to produce more wealth for the country, so I'm going to get an MBA'. MBAs have exploded in popularity in the last 30 years to enable people to loot the west. Why do MBAs make more than Engineers, Scientists, Farmers and so forth? They are not uniquely enlightened if you ask me. George Carlin had some good stuff to say about this.
The second point Rand overlooked is morality. Her characters would be considered very moral to most people. I won't devlve into objectivism but they all valued wealth and the fair exchange of wealth by means of money. No stealing, fair exchange. If everyone was an objectivist this might work, but they're not. There's another moral code in this world that many people entertain but few practice which once held capitalism in check by self restraining individuals with great power. I'm talking about Christianity. I don't think any real Christian theologist would disagree that the bailouts infringe on the commandment 'thou shall not steal'. Capitalism should be a tool used by free people to provide for themselves, their familys and community, not an end unto itself as Rand seemed to think.
April 2008 Global Population: 6.8 billion
April 2010 Global Population: 7 billion
April 2012 Global Population: 7.2 billion
April 2010 Global Population: 7 billion
April 2012 Global Population: 7.2 billion
-
Ainan - Tar Sands
- Posts: 599
- Joined: Mon 18 Feb 2008, 04:00:00
Re: Atlas Shrugged
by Tyler_JC » Fri 11 Dec 2009, 18:08:02
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rangerone314', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('John Galt', '&')quot;The political system we will build is contained in a single moral premise: no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force,"
Those who support libertarianism and laissez-faire economics seem to overlook the fact that corporations can have as much power as, and function like, governments.
I wonder how quasi-governments like HomeOwnersAssociations and CreditBureaus figure into Ayn Rand. Big Business is every bit as bad as Big Government and every bit as intrusive into the lives of ordinary people. In this country at least, it is hard to function without interacting with Big Business in someway.
Homeowners Associations are voluntary. Governments are compulsory. If you don't like your HOA, you can leave. If you don't like your government, they throw you in a metal cage.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he theory of laissez-faire capitalism is that humans as a rule are lazy, no good and untrustworthy, and need market incentives to be productive.
The theory of libertarianism is that you don't need government to regulate people or businesses because the wealthy and corporations are hardworking, good and trustworthy.
LOL, no cognitive dissonance there.
The theory of Socialism is that you need the government to regulate people and businesses because governments are full of trustworthy, hardworking, and good people whereas businesses are full of greedy, self-absorbed people.
LOL, no cognitive dissonance there.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')ts good to support mob-rule-economics where people make "rational" decisions in the market place by "voting" with their dollars, but "mob-rule" direct democracy is a non-starter because you can't trust those same people to make rational decisions in the voting booth.
LOL, no cognitive dissonance there, either.
McDonald's can't force me to buy a product. If I don't "buy" government services, I get thrown in a metal cage.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')y supporting laissez-faire capitalism, libertarians are demonstrating that they are merely providing ideological cover for people with money and power to do as they please. Intellectual puppets for the rich. Must be fun to have billions of dollars and delusions of persecution. Then again megalomania, narcissism, paranoia and greed are frequent travelling companions.
