yay, lets privatize the police force. Let the creativity of the wealthy individual decide the "art" of law enforcement!! NO!! Ayn Rand is too politically and emotionally inspired to be a good philosopher. Her book is no more than Animal Farm on steroid.
@yauyyb yay, lets monopolize the police force with a group that is above the law! After all monopolies especially impervious violent monopolies always perform better than competing businesses.
@yelloyo awwwwwwwwwwwwww~~ so you think business succeed by out competing each other through better price or service?? not in this planet, unfortunately.
@yelloyo no, that is sooo 80s boy. Try pitching to a merchant bank with a plan pf "efficiency and low cost" and you will see what I mean. You won't get a dime. Investors are only interested in Monopolistic advantages nowaday.
@yauyyb Well banks are a prime example of government protected institutions. They have very little incentive to compete, or to innovate. In a freemarket, the only way to defeat competition and gain your monopoly is to innovate.
@yelloyo In a freemarket capitalism, good capitalist will always try their best to make it less free for their competitors, through government intervention or private cooperate contract with dependent industries. For denying competitors yield much high return than improving service.
@52000rightwing That's the problem; It's the same with my university: it's chock full of yummy mummies and pretty professors. With some lecturers, I have difficulty concentrating on what they're saying.
Reason is prior to individualism. One of the reasons 'classical Liberals' find Rand strange is that her basis for the argument for individualism isn't the same as theirs, which often relies upon religion to support it. If you treat individualism as 'the main point' of her work then you won't understand it. Fortunately, she doesn't leave this to chance and in Atlas Shrugged the argument for her philosophy begins at the beginning.
Liberty is a better reality than this awful ideology and false pretense for profiteering and lawless corrupt crony capitalism. Who benefits from Paul Ryan's Rand talk? Monopolies steal from us all, and they are doing it every day. You are in the wrong parade, no matter how many pats on the back and bonuses they off to craft propaganda for profiteers and privateers.
Liberty is not the freedom to drunk drive, shout fire to profit off panic, or to wipe out the SEC. So stop degrading it, Prof!
@ibringthereals "Liberty is not the freedom to drunk drive, shout fire to profit off panic, or to wipe out the SEC." Certainly not!, that runs counter to the morals of Liberty/Libertarianism: that you may conduct your affairs as long as they do not infringe upon the life & liberty of another (is that a correct summation?). And I'm not talking of "Rights", incidentally, aside from the individual right to Life, Liberty, and property as a result of their own labour.
@jontycampbell So who wants to debate the number of angels that dance on the heads of pins as SEC was in fact wiped out decades ago by folks who still pay stooges to use the false pretense (and Rand's "free market" ideologies) to justify their profiteering and monopoly building?
In spite of her own theories, in the end, Ayn Rand jealously chased her young lover (a grad student assistant) all over Manhattan, making scenes in fine restaurants. And Karl Marx died penniless.
@ibringthereals Marx Died Penniless? I say. Well, it seems Rand became increasingly eccentric, to say the least! I'd venture we have a different interpretation of Free market: for me it always should be about allowing many independent firms in a sector, which we are free to choose among on quality, service & price that suits us. We get to vote our approval with firms via the $ in our pockets every day. Monopoly & oligopoly are anathemas to us, the consumer, to jobseekers and to the nation?
@jontycampbell Monopolies, if they are not created by govt regulations( utilities, AT&T years ago), are very rare. However, to the extent they exist/ have existed, that is the natural result of competition. Competition eventually, through economies of scale, and the fact people may come to like a certain company better, has a winner. It grows. But we have seen time after time, that these older, larger corps get overrun by younger, more agile and innovative ones.
@ibringthereals Oh, I must confess I do have a paperback copy of AS, though I've not started on it yet save for reading some notes on her rather forthright philosophy, 'Objectivism' in the back of the novel (which is a tad B&W for me). I'm afraid what Prof. Burns was saying didn't really soak in -I was too distracted by her lovely blue eyes - sorry. I'll have to watch again with the screen off! So AS had poor reviews eh? I assume The Fountainhead is better?
@ibringthereals If govt doesnt regulate and protect corps into becoming monopolies, they form by pleasing customers. This isnt bad. Profiteering isnt sustainable, as high profits cause capital to flow into competition, because others want to make higher profits too. The added supply will reduce "profiteering". Exxon makes 8% after tax profit, retail unleaded around $3.25 do the math. Tax at the pump is far, far more than 25 cents.
Wet behind the ears, Dixie-VA college Prof who poses TURNSPEAK, counter factual question to help profiteer's defend their monopolies, based on perverse Ayn Rand crush does it RIGHT!
Wake up sister-- John Galt called. He said the false pretense is false and: A. I'm fiction, and B. teh glorious, sexy individual in a vaccum is pure myth, and 99% stand no chance in Rand's distopian Amerika.
@ibringthereals - So you quote a Prof who never lived in the real world and has a profession based wholly on fleecing the tax payers (aka real workers/producers) and gained exclusively through political clout has a moral stance which attacks the real workers/producers as the basis of your brilliant economic master?
@thomaserossi I'm quoting a professor? So, you're the guy who hears a dog whistle when he watches his FOX brain wash, and thinks he can just insult people he doesn't know? He makes straw man arguments and thinks nobody can tell because he can't tell-- too ignorant and dishonest to see.
You're the guy who's read some Ayn Rand and only needs the one book to cement his head, as he waits for the Fox propaganda talking points. Your .22 doesn't impress anyone but you, jackass.
Ayn Rand was profoundly jealous of her much younger graduate student lover, who she followed around NYC making public scenes as he dated women his own age. This humiliated her husband, even as she was unconcerned. She also modeled her characters on William Edward Hickman, the famous serial killer, for his "individualism".
Rand was more than half crazy, in a sociopath/psychopath way. Logical yes, but hypocrisy is a moral failing, not a logical one. But be sure, it is an EPIC FAIL.
She's a long standing joke in the academia world. Why people take this nonsense seriously should be left to psychological researchers, not economists.
@michaelwuzthere Well, it's pretty easy to understand why she's taken as seriously as she is. Rand offers reinforcement for what free-market fetishists would like to believe. That's it. Lots of third rate thinkers have been promoting for this reason over the years.
@colddrake80 Funny, but what seemed far out in her book "Atlas" has all come to pass. The industrialists in the book went on strike, in the mountains hiding out, but now, they just hide out their capital in other nations, and outsourcing, Close enough.
I find it interesting that she embraces the idea of Regulatory Capture when it applies to "liberal thinking" or a capital market, but doesn't acknowledge how a Randian system may abuse the same economic concept. She fails to address how a product like Reardon metal's exclusivity is reliant on the patent machine, and that many industries squander innovations they themselves produce, or overpower the good ideas of less established individuals or corporations with financial and regulatory clout.
@TheBSG This is a good point about the "patent machine." The richest people in the world have just as many if not more problems than the poorest. I would be more than willing to argue that they are unhappy with their lives. Genuine happiness comes from helping others, not from being able to gain money and power through competition. I personally find it hard to ignore the marketing of this happiness to me, like buy these $500 shoes...you'll be happy!
I would not suggest her NOVELS as a source of serious philosophical or political understanding, but you could read "This is John Galt speaking" and get a pretty clear picture of who he was.
I got an Econ Degree 32 years ago. I don't know if it was a blessing or a curse! Even though I'm personally somewhat "Progressive" I still know that Ludwig Von Mises, Rothbard and Hazlitt are logically right. Most people haven't even caught up with Adam Smith in their Economic knowledge and it's frustrating to watch this whole thing play out...
@randy95023 Why haven't we caught on? Is it not obvious that 'markets' are people, and that you cannot legislate to control the markets without controlling people? Surely both Socialists, libertarians, liberals AND conservatives can agree on that? (I don't know about here though :-) )
Really Ayn Rand's philosophy boils down to this: 1) Reality can be objectively verified through a particular process of reasoning I will just call 'reason'. 2) I somehow found this mystical 'reason' that allows me to see the world objectively. 3) If anyone disagrees with me, a priori they must be wrong; to deny it is to deny a core tenant of my philosophy. 4) Therefore I have no obligation to argue with anyone I disagree with. I'm right, they're wrong. 5) NANANANANANA FUCK Y'ALL!!!
@jontycampbell I have no idea how what I said relates to Solipsism; Solipsism is an epistemological premise that only the mind is real or at least can be known to be real. What I was pointing out was Rand's circular logic that permits her philosophy to be held unaccountably as dogma; she manipulated the phrase reason and defined it how she wished, so when challenged she nominally justified herself with it. That's not an epistemological philosophy, though; it's a confidence trick.
Just Saying... Ayn Rand's book was written out of pure hate.
Let's sum it up, shall we Paul Krugman:
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs"
@ThatBlackPanda Let`s sum it up, shall we Adam Smith? "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self interest." You fucking morons.
@luvcheney1 Indeed, all markets are driven by self-interest aren't they? I don't mean selfishness in a douchey sense but a, well...if we all led our lives doing things *for* other folk we'd never get on with our own lives - I mean that Smith was pointing out -I think- the baker's self interest comprises getting a sale, ours from buying some lovely fresh granary rolls, what? Hmph I'm hungry now.
@ThatBlackPanda clearly you're impressed by inane quotes from people with letter titles, even those whose legacy is one of perpetually being 180 wrong. No wonder you disdain Rand's emphasis on productivity. Ever seen Paul Krugman? No more socially crippled a person exists. His economics have destroyed America and his answer is to root for mass extinction of humans. Pathetic. No fool would ever claim Krugman has a better grip on reality than Rand. You're embarrassing yourself..
I love how you say "His economics have destroyed America and his answer is to root for mass extinction of humans". If I know you weren't kidding, I would call you a failed troll lol.
@ThatBlackPanda Krugman is a declared eugenicist, and has been part of the movement since the 70's. There is a preponderance of evidence for this, and I will not bear the burden of protecting you from yourself. You'd be wise to do so rather than continue to be the type of fool who rah-rah's the ideas of a person who wouldn't find you fit to live. Especially to a person who finds that type of thought despicable, and respects your humanity. Got a smart ass answer for that?
Lets pretend he was a eugenicist (which is BS), what does that have to do with economics? Truth is Ron Paul is clearly a racist, but he is still (sadly) the best choice for president. The fact of the matter is that Ayn Rand is a hateful person who has a hateful club of people who want to pretend as though they were smart. A philosophy of selfishness is as needed (and as intellectually stimulating) as a philosophy of lust.
"A system designed to protect individual liberty will have no punishments for any group and no privileges. Today, I think inner-city folks and minorities are punished unfairly in the war on drugs. For instance, Blacks make up 14% of those who use drugs, yet 36 percent of those arrested are Blacks and it ends up that 63% of those who finally end up in prison are Blacks.
"For federal purposes, I no longer believe in the death penalty. I believe it has been issued unjustly. If you're rich, you get away with it; if you're poor and you're from the inner city, you're more likely to be prosecuted and convicted."
Oh good... Ron Paul quotes in support of Black People... sort of.
Look, I can tell you quotes from Stalin that support political dissidence but it is late and I would not like you to feel as though pulling quotes earn you any prestige in this debate.
I will say this however, Ron Paul does speak truth.
He is not one to lie even though he (allegedly) dislikes minorities.
Which is why he is the best choice for president... and is also a racist.
He's (sadly) the best choice? If you think it's "sad" that he wants to end wars and all foreign entanglements (which affects lower income and minorities more than any others) then you're right. If you think it's "sad" he wants to end the war on drugs (which put minorities in prison at a great rate than whites) then you're right.
He is good on somethings... but he is still insane (but honest).
He is sadly the best choice because it shows how far our system has fell since Clinton.
Never before has everyone been so clearly bought in the presidential election.
The lies use to be hard to spot.
It is so bad that I, a progressive, have to side with a crazy ass libertarian due to everyone else being part of the same system. He want's to go back to the Gold standard... seriously dude... the gold standard.
Let's see, I can verify Ron Paul actually said these things, as opposed to the twenty year old, unproven "newsletter" that keeps creeping around only when he is doing well in the polls. Otherwise, he's simply ignored.
Throwing around the term racist at someone without proof, when in fact the opposite can be proven, is intellectually lazy and not really worth my response. So just ignore this and go back believing everything you see, hear, or read without verifying. SHEEP....
@ThatBlackPanda "Rand's book was written out of pure hate."Interestingly enough I have a paperback copy though I've not read more than the notes at the back. Do you mean Rand wrote it as a kind of rant against the world because it wouldn't accord with her emotionally hurt and damaged personality? Perhaps she had low self-esteem and reflected this in a degree of misanthropy, no? yes?
So, they are realizing that the obsession with selfishness and personal wealth is falling out of favor, and trying to form an ad-hoc argument that associates themselves with the prevailing trend in popular thought. That's fine. I just hope people can understand that these suddenly-progressive movements are opportunistic followers, so they can ignore them. We should continue forming our own ideas, sharing our thoughts and experiences, as we have already been doing.
@sevenslimysnails so you've clearly never read a word of Rand. Why even comment?
People who actually know what they're talking about know that every character in Atlas shared one trait: a love of PRODUCTIVITY. Quite to the contrary all disdained money, a result of those who sought it dishonestly. Like in reality, these people are politicians, academics, and society's hangers on.
So what is this "prevailing trend in popular thought"? I love the smell of BS in the morning...
@BoxScientific No need for hostility. Rand explicitly said her philosophy was about the moral superiority of selfishness. You can love and interpret her book how ever you want, no one is stopping you, but people are starting to lose interest in validating their own emotions. If you really believe Rand just wanted everyone to be productive, then be happy knowing that this is a generally accepted principle, so her philosophy doesn't need spreading.
@sevenslimysnails what you try to pass for logic is pop trash. "People are starting to lose faith in validating their emotions". This is a statement of what? Fact? Truth? Logic? I DO believe in the moral superiority of selfishness, I figured it out long before I ever heard of Rand, and I never sold them out for the meaningless type of pop trash you're talking. You want to deny that these philosophies haven't been defeated by yours in 50+ years but you can't. So sorry...
Belief != fact. Objectivism lays out zero sound epistemology. I doubt you could either.
That's not to say left-progressivism is the answer, but Objectivism is pure idealism. Most of it hasn't been "proven wrong" because it's NOT PHILOSOPHY to even be taken that seriously. Behavioral econ easily refutes her faux economic principles.
@dark7element Well Picasso, Dali, and Eisenstein also led quite peculiar personal lives. We all know they never amounted to much....Try reading sometime, you just might learn something.....
I could write a book about how much I hate ayn rand. I think I'd call it "atlas shat and felt better about himself". ready for some ad hominem? Rand was preachy, pretentious and a bad wife. Thats right, she loved attention and getting fucked by people behind her husbands back, who supported her, while extolling the virtues of greed.
No, I don't particularly want to live in a world where liberty has been traded away for equality and security, but since that kind of world has never existed, it is not really a relevant question for me. The poor, the weak, and the sick have never had equality or security. Neither, however, do I want to live in Rand's ideal world, where Reardan Metals is free to in innovate and thrive, but where that freedom also allows Reardan to freely pollute and ruin the planet for temporary profit.
@daokuk Perhaps Reardon Metals is less polluting than 3rd world metal? If we regulate it enough, we can make it too expensive, and 3rd World Metals will take over market share, and "cleaner" Reardon will be out of business. As so often is the case today. Outsourcing? To China? Never heard of it? Think China is CLEANER? Go ahead! raise those costs here, every way you can think of! Taxes, regulations, EPA, Lawsuits, healthcare, 10 minute breaks, gay bathrooms, free tampons.
@luvcheney1 You are right, perhaps Reardon Metals would be cleaner. Perhaps though if Reardon prospers in our hypothetical unregulated Randian world, then Reardan's competitors would be forced to cut corners and could in response use processes that would be polluting or dangerous. As often occurs today, even with some regulations.
As a side query, what's wrong with ten minute breaks?
@daokuk Free Market advocates desire laws. Laws protecting private property, enforcing contracts, personal safety. Dangerous pollution is bad, but civil liability, lawsuits, create a path to justice, and discourage bad behavior. Dangerous conditions also solved the same way. Laws. Regulators are not effective. Note the Corzine issue of MF Global. CFTC is the regulator. Nice job. BP was regulated. Nice job.
@luvcheney1 I do agree that regulators are not effective. But I don't believe the legal system can handle the amount of litigation required to ‘police’ a free market. Most people, especially where profit is involved, are not that honest and there would be too many cases to attend to. But you and I will never agree, really. I have a lot more negative view about where ‘civilization’ has led us and think more of the same will bring even more suffering.
@daokuk You do realize that the world is supporting a far higher population than was ever thought possible in the past? Which simply means a far higher level of productivity than ever believed possible. For many 1000`s of years, people worked 16 hrs a day in agriculture, their kids too, in backbreaking labor, just to eek out a basic means of survival, and it was very tenuous. This still is the case for billions. We can afford leisure, pleasure. That was impossible for the masses, before
@luvcheney1 And these peasants who worked so hard had rulers living in palaces who could feed every single one of them and allow them a more leisurely lifestyle. Technology has given the modern peasant an upgrade, but only because we are not the slave classes of the 3rd world. What is modern leisure and pleasure? Shopping at the mall, watching movies and eating junk food (all mind control).
@hathorrox Banal happiness is not necessarily immoral, it can be moral as a form of satisfaction of the human condition. Some people are simply fine with simple lives and voluntarily lead them, others are anxious and like to connect to more people, create more things, and participate in society to greater degrees. However, I think the current safety net system encourages more people to be lazy than otherwise. It takes less income these days to participate in those simple addicting luxuries.
@MadPutz Why does it matter if it's moral or immoral? That's all based on the current religious and popular stance anyway. The speaker says Ayn Rand argues that being allowed to compete against others makes the individual more prosperous and creative. I'm arguing that it does not. It only makes them miserable with a status to hide behind. On the other hand, using a new material to help build railroads in underdeveloped countries would make someone happy.
@hathorrox So because of the lulling effect of the safety net, certain people who do little may not recognize what they can gain from a higher plane of activity and community engagement and doing business/research/creativity/charity whatever
@hathorrox The "slave classes of the 3rd world" in China have seen their real wages increase 7-fold since the liberation of the economy in the enterprise zones. Your leisure is up to you what you do with it. I still am able to actually find books.
"David Dollar World Bank Country Director,China has been most rapidly growing economy in world over past 25 yrs. Growth has led to an extraordinary increase in real living standards and to an unprecedented decline in poverty. World Bank estimates more than 60% of population living under $1 per day poverty line at start of economic reform. That poverty headcount ratio had declined to 10% by 2004, indicating that about 500 million people have been lifted out of poverty in a generation."
@daokuk Part 2). OOOPS! Forgot the 10 minute breaks. Nothing is wrong with 10 min breaks, I guess. Except people smoke on them, eat, drink coffee, etc. Then 20 min later need to take a shit, pee, and need another 10 min break, they used the other one to play Angry Birds. How do you tell an employee NOT to go shit? And how can you tell him NOT to take a 10 min break, when law requires it? So, he gets several, which raises costs. Which, you pay when you buy product there.
All Rand wanted to do, was to get the conversation started about the existing of God, meaning she didn't believe in God. She was an Atheist and a Jew. Most of her work was just smoke and mirrors for that point. Was she a capitalist?: Who knows for sure, she couldn't very well write books back then that were anti capitalism and anti God, could she?! American Society back then would have run her out of town back then...right?!
Prof. Burns: " There's a debate as to where to place Rand in the American Intellectual / Political Tradition." I'll tell you where to place her... Place her in the garbage bin! Atlas Shrugged is one of the most transcendently awful novels I've ever read. The characters in the novel were so wooden the text could be cut with a chainsaw! If you have a genuine love of literature, and have enjoyed great authors (Melville, Twain, George Eliot) don't wade through Rand's schlock novel, life's too short!
@CosmicFork you must not know what the word literature means. Rand created an amazing world with her words. Although I think The Fountainhead was better then Atlas Shrugged. Sure her main characters were very rigid and non changing, but they had to be. That is how they were to show their strength.
@KORreaper are you fucking kidding me i read all the way through anthem and the last 2 chapters is the main character ranting about how amazing he is. she is not a good writer she is horrible. explain to me how she is a good writer
@httm241 anthem was terrible. it was like second person wasn't it? But i don't care about anthem i'm talking "Atlas shrugged" and "The Fountainhead" Those were very well written and really fun to read. I liked a lot of her descriptions and attention to small details. Although I wish she hadn't talked about music like the reader could actually hear it.
Disagree, liberal thought focuses more on collectivism instead of individualism. The further left that you move, the more controls are placed on people through government. Free markets are directly opposed to liberalism. Liberalism mandates government intervention at first, and then government control as the end. This video is a lot of spin, in trying to link Rand to liberals. In truth, both Democrats and Republicans are working towards the same world government, which is what Rand warned.
Oh my god no. I don't want to live in the world of Atlas Shrugged. Because Rand had no clue, because she was an egotist, hack, sociopath, and in the world of ideas, a whore. Because the world of the totally empowered individual that Rand envisioned does exist, and it's in Somalia, in Mogadishu, in rural Afghanistan, wherever brutal dictators flourish without the limitations of English rule of law, contract rights and the rights of man. Profit and power, always, before people.
@smith930 you do realize that one of Rand's "laws" with her philosophy is that no one is to use force to control other, only when threatened with force. Although I can't remember if that was a literal force like violence, or any force like political influence.
The true sign of failure in an ideology is when it has to be subsidized. The most heavily subsidized ideologies in the history of the world are the Catholic Church and Libertarianism. They could not survive the freemarket place of ideas unless there was massive financial backing behind their propaganda machines. They each make about as much sense as Scientology and Marxism! This video was uploaded by learnliberty, & (IHS) funded by Koch Family Foundation, Oil, Gas and Chemical Conglomerates!
"There's a debate as to where to place Rand in the American Intellectual/ Political tradition." I agree with americanmuslimgirl, "Place her in the garbage bin!" To professional philosophers, Rand is a longstanding joke. The real crux of her idiotic ideas is her notion of "ethical egoism," that what people ought to do (morally) is promote their own individual interests exclusively. That means we all ought to be selfish, all the time, needless to say, her arguments for this position are ludicrous!
@MutantBamHammer You'll probably want to pitch it in the dumpster after the first couple of chapters... But, I'll let you be the judge yourself. I'm trying to imagine how anyone could wade through all 1,170 pages of Atlas Shrugged. I found the characters in the book to be so wooden the text could be cut with a chainsaw. The book makes a good doorstop for my bedroom door though... keeps it open, even when the cat rubbs against it... but, I'll send it to ya, if you want...the book, that is...
I can tell you where to place her. You can place her in the garbage bin. She was utterly simplistic, ridiculously racist, a self-hating woman, a horrible wife, a horrible friend, and very naive. Her characters don't exist in the real world. The only people who think her characters are possible in this world are pimply teenagers who haven't done enough thinking of their own yet, so they happily hand their brains to a simplistic ideologue who makes the whole world starkly black and white for them.
@Seabeck32 the EPA gives folks a false sense of security in my opinion. A clean environment is a scientific challenge. Therefore it requires a technological, not political, solution. Every day that we believe we are helping the environment by voting for a certain candidate, liking a certain Facebook page, wearing a certain color wristband, etc is a day we ruin the environment through our collective inaction. EPA or no, we are each responsible for and derive value from a clean environment. Thanks
yeah even Rand's characters exist within a corporate "framework" lol ...they are "free " to be individuals. But yet they are suspicious of the government "framework"...lol, and they are not free. just another way of saying, im a greedy motherfucker and i am exempt from the rule of law through the corporate "framework." I guess that's called "corporate individuality" ha ha ha ha ha. its also an oxymoron. Rand is a oxy-MORON. Love that logic sexylady...Burns I mean.
If a business is pollution the air, people of the neighborhood could sue them the same way that you could sue another neighbor who is dumping garbage in your backyard. I still don't see why we need a government agency to allow the businesses to pollute... they should not be allowed to pollute at all.
Crony capitalism is bad, agreed. But completely unregulated capitalism is arguably worse. I like to use the analogy of football. Without the referees the game would inevitably descend into chaos and violence without rules and enforcers of those rules. But the referees MUST be impartial and solely focused on maximizing the competition and quality of the game. You cannot have referees personally gaining from the outcomes of matches.
@justncase80 You are describing the current situation.Violence would not result in football because it would destroy the context of the game. People behave much better because of self interest as opposed to threat of force. And referees are never impartial in the absence of accountability for their decisions, hence our current situation.
"So Rand is saying that [...] you don't really have objective rule of law. You have subjective laws that pass when certain people are more connected with the government. And are able to use the government for competitive advantage in the workplace."
Wow, sounds exactly like how politicians are bought off by huge corporations today.
Ayn Rand was a sociopathic-moron who thought she could survive on her own genius but when cancer threatened to wipe out the little bit of wealth she managed to put away for her old age she changed her name and applied for welfare benefits. The queen of the Libertarians, a stupid bitch preaching to the ignorant. She had a modicum of success on her own but like other so called self made successes, when she failed, she quickly turned to the state to keep her ass off the street.
@SkepticThink I like having the FAA making sure our planes are safe, FDA making sure our food is safe, a military to protect us, police and fireman to protect us, i like having public roads, bridges and parks. I like knowing I will have some basic security in my old age, even if my savings evaporate in the wall street casino. I don't mind paying basic taxes to enjoy all these benefits to society.
Well, they stop being basic taxes when the agencies grow to thousands of workers and their budget grows steadily. But even if they were basic taxes, is the US better with or without these agencies?
You're looking at the positives without the negatives. The FDA also blocks many drugs that could save a ton of lives, so in effect the FDA indirectly kills many people as well. Local police and firemen aren't federal groups. What about the department of commerce, do you think it's good?
@SkepticThink The US is better with these agencies. Would you rather return to the 1800's when pollution was rampant, snake oil was sold as a cure-all and life expectancy was 46. Also, taxes are at their lowest rate in 50 years!! Even lower than Reagan, that socialist.
@Saebeck32 You're wrong, here's why: Take for example, rBST, an additive given to dairy cows to increase milk production. You'll noticed that it is *very* seldomly still used on dairy cows, and most milk you purchase (that isn't Hy-Top brand) is labelled as being rBST-free. The milk-producers abandonned rBST because their consumers doubted its safety and complained. If we, the consumers, refuse to to purchase products we deem unworthy of our effort, the producers will conform to us.
@ignbtd If you made a similar argument for Brett Easton Ellis, I might agree with you. Ayn Rand, however, demonstrated in numerous interviews that she was as dull as the characters in her books. She was humorless and not the most clever person. I don't think there was a "design" to her work. She only communicated to the best her abilities.
@oolong2 That is that these laws, and a few others like them, guarantee that to prosper you must give other people what they want, and otherwise leave them alone. The free market, unless you're talking to an anarchist, is not about the market itself being free, but of all individuals being free to operate within and according to the market. That is the basis of all human prosperity. Because humans who are free, are productive, and productivity is the whole point of the study of economics.
@whbon73 So true. it is amazing how selfish people can be. Rand promotes this to the masses. Burns buy's into it because she knows where the money is. It's all about money in the end, until we imagine a brighter future without it.
This would be great if Atlas Shrugged was any good. It was political muckraking written by a hack, who, because she was a vocal, opinionated woman in a male dominated field, has been idolized. There are many female political philosophers with better ideas who are being overshadowed by Rand.
yeah, and you know whats hotter? the shit coming out of her mouth. Rand was a woman that didn't really believe this philosophy--she w as a philosophical hackjob. She lived in a dreamworld surrounded by elitist, spoiled rotten "individualists" that could afford the masses into slavery so they can be "liberal". Like Mill, Rand is full of shit because "free markets" do not exist in a hierarchical monetary capitalist system. Elites are "free" to use markets and control them. Atlas took a big shit.
@eggory I dont care for debate etiquette with this childish propaganda for dimwits like yourself. Everyone is sick and tired of this An Rand bullshit. She was a female spokeswomen for the men in charge. They liked her because she espoused insanity at the expensive of the masses. here's another ten year old comment: Eat shit. :)
@bullshit3118 Is it insecurity that drives you to pretend that everyone agrees with you? Why don't you just speak for yourself. All you damned socialists are always trolling every video about capitalism telling everybody what 'everybody knows'. It's a joke. There is a serious debate going on but you systematically refuse to acknowledge that it has two sides, with your head buried in the sand.
@eggory it is blab blah blah vblah.....blah blah blah blah...you fucking selfish little rat. you dont even know what the fuck socialism means you turd bucket. Do you know what corporate welfare is asshole? hows that for state sponsored tax payer funding monies going into banker salaries and bonuses? Deny it all you want, you're kind is going down. Ann Rand is a junior intellectual and welathy man's sweet little sister. this government is gonna get some goddamned regulation and your gonna know it
@bullshit3118 Ad hominem attacks don't get you anywhere. Corporate welfare is state intervention. Corporations shouldn't exist at all, they are nothing but, shields for an individual, or groups of individuals, to protect themselves, and their property, from the mistakes they make. The government regulations caused the problem, we have a broken banking system set up by the government. Our country was fought for, by people who hated centralized banks, now we have a monster of one. Go figure.
@bullshit3118 Socialism, communism, fascism, are all just different forms of oligarchy. They put the planning of the many in the hands of the few. The power should come from the individual, and not some fraudulent government.
@bullshit3118 The way the US was designed was to be planned by the many, and not by the few. The federal government was not supposed to be as powerful as it is, the most important thing to a person politically, was that of city counsel, and not what happens 3,000 miles away. See, i warned you about ad hominem attacks, you should work on them. They are a sign of a losing argument.
@asleeperj Firstly, the U.S. was not designed to be for the many. technically its a constitutional republic--look it up on wikipedia if you dont feel like reading about it. Youare thinking of the "American Dream" ideology, which is a lie in a monetary system.James Madison and George Washington wanted a single party thats why they created the federal government--read the Federalist papers, will ya? You are a high school debater, you dont even know your own history. ad hominem yourself.
yay, lets privatize the police force. Let the creativity of the wealthy individual decide the "art" of law enforcement!! NO!! Ayn Rand is too politically and emotionally inspired to be a good philosopher. Her book is no more than Animal Farm on steroid.
yauyyb 3 days ago
@yauyyb I think we should, but ss I understand it, that is one thing Ayn Rand definately did not want to privatize.
mortalisk 3 days ago
@yauyyb yay, lets monopolize the police force with a group that is above the law! After all monopolies especially impervious violent monopolies always perform better than competing businesses.
yelloyo 2 days ago
@yelloyo awwwwwwwwwwwwww~~ so you think business succeed by out competing each other through better price or service?? not in this planet, unfortunately.
yauyyb 2 days ago
@yauyyb Of course not, businesses succeed by producing the most efficiently and generating the lowest costs.
yelloyo 2 days ago
@yelloyo no, that is sooo 80s boy. Try pitching to a merchant bank with a plan pf "efficiency and low cost" and you will see what I mean. You won't get a dime. Investors are only interested in Monopolistic advantages nowaday.
yauyyb 2 days ago
@yauyyb Well banks are a prime example of government protected institutions. They have very little incentive to compete, or to innovate. In a freemarket, the only way to defeat competition and gain your monopoly is to innovate.
yelloyo 2 days ago
@yelloyo In a freemarket capitalism, good capitalist will always try their best to make it less free for their competitors, through government intervention or private cooperate contract with dependent industries. For denying competitors yield much high return than improving service.
yauyyb 2 days ago
Very interesting. She's also a bit easier on the eyes than the rest of the LearnLiberty economists.
52000rightwing 6 days ago
@52000rightwing That's the problem; It's the same with my university: it's chock full of yummy mummies and pretty professors. With some lecturers, I have difficulty concentrating on what they're saying.
jontycampbell 6 days ago
Reason is prior to individualism. One of the reasons 'classical Liberals' find Rand strange is that her basis for the argument for individualism isn't the same as theirs, which often relies upon religion to support it. If you treat individualism as 'the main point' of her work then you won't understand it. Fortunately, she doesn't leave this to chance and in Atlas Shrugged the argument for her philosophy begins at the beginning.
WalterLiddy 1 week ago
Jennifer Burns...mmmmmmmm.
jontycampbell 1 week ago
Jennifer Burns has no place to talk about this...
tkloppel 2 weeks ago
No I don't. But I do.
Visfen 1 month ago
Um..let me think, HELL NO.
THEENaners247 1 month ago
no i do not
1WEEBLE1 1 month ago
where's the spoiler alert?
octapotamus 1 month ago
Liberty is a better reality than this awful ideology and false pretense for profiteering and lawless corrupt crony capitalism. Who benefits from Paul Ryan's Rand talk? Monopolies steal from us all, and they are doing it every day. You are in the wrong parade, no matter how many pats on the back and bonuses they off to craft propaganda for profiteers and privateers.
Liberty is not the freedom to drunk drive, shout fire to profit off panic, or to wipe out the SEC. So stop degrading it, Prof!
ibringthereals 1 month ago
@ibringthereals "Liberty is not the freedom to drunk drive, shout fire to profit off panic, or to wipe out the SEC." Certainly not!, that runs counter to the morals of Liberty/Libertarianism: that you may conduct your affairs as long as they do not infringe upon the life & liberty of another (is that a correct summation?). And I'm not talking of "Rights", incidentally, aside from the individual right to Life, Liberty, and property as a result of their own labour.
jontycampbell 1 week ago
@jontycampbell So who wants to debate the number of angels that dance on the heads of pins as SEC was in fact wiped out decades ago by folks who still pay stooges to use the false pretense (and Rand's "free market" ideologies) to justify their profiteering and monopoly building?
In spite of her own theories, in the end, Ayn Rand jealously chased her young lover (a grad student assistant) all over Manhattan, making scenes in fine restaurants. And Karl Marx died penniless.
ibringthereals 1 week ago
@ibringthereals Marx Died Penniless? I say. Well, it seems Rand became increasingly eccentric, to say the least! I'd venture we have a different interpretation of Free market: for me it always should be about allowing many independent firms in a sector, which we are free to choose among on quality, service & price that suits us. We get to vote our approval with firms via the $ in our pockets every day. Monopoly & oligopoly are anathemas to us, the consumer, to jobseekers and to the nation?
jontycampbell 1 week ago
@jontycampbell Monopolies, if they are not created by govt regulations( utilities, AT&T years ago), are very rare. However, to the extent they exist/ have existed, that is the natural result of competition. Competition eventually, through economies of scale, and the fact people may come to like a certain company better, has a winner. It grows. But we have seen time after time, that these older, larger corps get overrun by younger, more agile and innovative ones.
luvcheney1 6 days ago
@ibringthereals Oh, I must confess I do have a paperback copy of AS, though I've not started on it yet save for reading some notes on her rather forthright philosophy, 'Objectivism' in the back of the novel (which is a tad B&W for me). I'm afraid what Prof. Burns was saying didn't really soak in -I was too distracted by her lovely blue eyes - sorry. I'll have to watch again with the screen off! So AS had poor reviews eh? I assume The Fountainhead is better?
jontycampbell 1 week ago
@ibringthereals If govt doesnt regulate and protect corps into becoming monopolies, they form by pleasing customers. This isnt bad. Profiteering isnt sustainable, as high profits cause capital to flow into competition, because others want to make higher profits too. The added supply will reduce "profiteering". Exxon makes 8% after tax profit, retail unleaded around $3.25 do the math. Tax at the pump is far, far more than 25 cents.
luvcheney1 6 days ago
Wet behind the ears, Dixie-VA college Prof who poses TURNSPEAK, counter factual question to help profiteer's defend their monopolies, based on perverse Ayn Rand crush does it RIGHT!
Wake up sister-- John Galt called. He said the false pretense is false and: A. I'm fiction, and B. teh glorious, sexy individual in a vaccum is pure myth, and 99% stand no chance in Rand's distopian Amerika.
ibringthereals 1 month ago
@ibringthereals - So you quote a Prof who never lived in the real world and has a profession based wholly on fleecing the tax payers (aka real workers/producers) and gained exclusively through political clout has a moral stance which attacks the real workers/producers as the basis of your brilliant economic master?
You're BEYOND stupid!
thomaserossi 1 month ago
Comment removed
ibringthereals 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@thomaserossi I'm quoting a professor? So, you're the guy who hears a dog whistle when he watches his FOX brain wash, and thinks he can just insult people he doesn't know? He makes straw man arguments and thinks nobody can tell because he can't tell-- too ignorant and dishonest to see.
You're the guy who's read some Ayn Rand and only needs the one book to cement his head, as he waits for the Fox propaganda talking points. Your .22 doesn't impress anyone but you, jackass.
ibringthereals 1 month ago
@thomaserossi Wait, doesn't Professor Burns work too?
jontycampbell 6 days ago
Ayn Rand was profoundly jealous of her much younger graduate student lover, who she followed around NYC making public scenes as he dated women his own age. This humiliated her husband, even as she was unconcerned. She also modeled her characters on William Edward Hickman, the famous serial killer, for his "individualism".
Rand was more than half crazy, in a sociopath/psychopath way. Logical yes, but hypocrisy is a moral failing, not a logical one. But be sure, it is an EPIC FAIL.
ibringthereals 1 month ago
@kaindrg ahhhhh the whole theme of the book.....?
SofaKingWhiteFU 1 month ago
Ayn Rand was not an intellectual by any stretch.
She's a long standing joke in the academia world. Why people take this nonsense seriously should be left to psychological researchers, not economists.
michaelwuzthere 1 month ago 2
@michaelwuzthere Well, it's pretty easy to understand why she's taken as seriously as she is. Rand offers reinforcement for what free-market fetishists would like to believe. That's it. Lots of third rate thinkers have been promoting for this reason over the years.
colddrake80 1 month ago
@colddrake80 Funny, but what seemed far out in her book "Atlas" has all come to pass. The industrialists in the book went on strike, in the mountains hiding out, but now, they just hide out their capital in other nations, and outsourcing, Close enough.
luvcheney1 1 month ago
I would hit it
supahsekzy 1 month ago 8
60 people prefer to call it "miracle metal"
sanitydotorg 1 month ago
why I don't have a professor like her... what a beauty!!
jpablotr 2 months ago
I find it interesting that she embraces the idea of Regulatory Capture when it applies to "liberal thinking" or a capital market, but doesn't acknowledge how a Randian system may abuse the same economic concept. She fails to address how a product like Reardon metal's exclusivity is reliant on the patent machine, and that many industries squander innovations they themselves produce, or overpower the good ideas of less established individuals or corporations with financial and regulatory clout.
TheBSG 2 months ago
@TheBSG This is a good point about the "patent machine." The richest people in the world have just as many if not more problems than the poorest. I would be more than willing to argue that they are unhappy with their lives. Genuine happiness comes from helping others, not from being able to gain money and power through competition. I personally find it hard to ignore the marketing of this happiness to me, like buy these $500 shoes...you'll be happy!
hathorrox 1 month ago
@ CosmicFork you are an idiot and a socialist.
SofaKingWhiteFU 2 months ago
@SofaKingWhiteFU and what part of that book do u agree with?
kaindrg 1 month ago
Ayn Rand was a real piece of work. She despised Christianity yet right-wing Christians just love her.
crumbtrey 2 months ago
@crumbtrey That doesn't make sense, does it? Why did she?
jontycampbell 6 days ago
Comment removed
mason72518 2 months ago
I would prefer to live in a condensed version where I can find out who John Galt is within a day or two.
StateExempt 2 months ago 19
@StateExempt
I'll help you out: he was a sociopath. Now you can spend your day or two reading actual philosophers like Kant, Hume, Hegel et al.
ephekt420 2 months ago
@ephekt420 - So he was just like Marx?
StateExempt 2 months ago
@StateExempt
Disordered thinking knows no ideological border. Marx's is just as specious and damaging socially/economically as a priorist neo-classicalism.
ephekt420 2 months ago
@ephekt420 - So was John Galt a marxist or not?
StateExempt 2 months ago
@StateExempt
Galt was Rand's perfect little Objectivist.
I would not suggest her NOVELS as a source of serious philosophical or political understanding, but you could read "This is John Galt speaking" and get a pretty clear picture of who he was.
ephekt420 2 months ago
I got an Econ Degree 32 years ago. I don't know if it was a blessing or a curse! Even though I'm personally somewhat "Progressive" I still know that Ludwig Von Mises, Rothbard and Hazlitt are logically right. Most people haven't even caught up with Adam Smith in their Economic knowledge and it's frustrating to watch this whole thing play out...
randy95023 2 months ago
@randy95023 Why haven't we caught on? Is it not obvious that 'markets' are people, and that you cannot legislate to control the markets without controlling people? Surely both Socialists, libertarians, liberals AND conservatives can agree on that? (I don't know about here though :-) )
jontycampbell 6 days ago
Really Ayn Rand's philosophy boils down to this: 1) Reality can be objectively verified through a particular process of reasoning I will just call 'reason'. 2) I somehow found this mystical 'reason' that allows me to see the world objectively. 3) If anyone disagrees with me, a priori they must be wrong; to deny it is to deny a core tenant of my philosophy. 4) Therefore I have no obligation to argue with anyone I disagree with. I'm right, they're wrong. 5) NANANANANANA FUCK Y'ALL!!!
raikespeare 2 months ago
@raikespeare Wait, I thought that was Solipsism?
jontycampbell 1 week ago
@jontycampbell I have no idea how what I said relates to Solipsism; Solipsism is an epistemological premise that only the mind is real or at least can be known to be real. What I was pointing out was Rand's circular logic that permits her philosophy to be held unaccountably as dogma; she manipulated the phrase reason and defined it how she wished, so when challenged she nominally justified herself with it. That's not an epistemological philosophy, though; it's a confidence trick.
raikespeare 6 days ago
Just Saying... Ayn Rand's book was written out of pure hate.
Let's sum it up, shall we Paul Krugman:
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs"
Yep... best Atlas Shrugged based quote ever.
ThatBlackPanda 2 months ago
@ThatBlackPanda Let`s sum it up, shall we Adam Smith? "It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self interest." You fucking morons.
luvcheney1 2 months ago
@luvcheney1 Indeed, all markets are driven by self-interest aren't they? I don't mean selfishness in a douchey sense but a, well...if we all led our lives doing things *for* other folk we'd never get on with our own lives - I mean that Smith was pointing out -I think- the baker's self interest comprises getting a sale, ours from buying some lovely fresh granary rolls, what? Hmph I'm hungry now.
jontycampbell 1 week ago
@ThatBlackPanda clearly you're impressed by inane quotes from people with letter titles, even those whose legacy is one of perpetually being 180 wrong. No wonder you disdain Rand's emphasis on productivity. Ever seen Paul Krugman? No more socially crippled a person exists. His economics have destroyed America and his answer is to root for mass extinction of humans. Pathetic. No fool would ever claim Krugman has a better grip on reality than Rand. You're embarrassing yourself..
BoxScientific 2 months ago
@BoxScientific
I love how you say "His economics have destroyed America and his answer is to root for mass extinction of humans". If I know you weren't kidding, I would call you a failed troll lol.
Lets make this simple:
EVIDENCE MOTHERFUCKER, DO YOU HAVE IT?
ThatBlackPanda 2 months ago
@ThatBlackPanda Krugman is a declared eugenicist, and has been part of the movement since the 70's. There is a preponderance of evidence for this, and I will not bear the burden of protecting you from yourself. You'd be wise to do so rather than continue to be the type of fool who rah-rah's the ideas of a person who wouldn't find you fit to live. Especially to a person who finds that type of thought despicable, and respects your humanity. Got a smart ass answer for that?
BoxScientific 2 months ago
@BoxScientific
Lets pretend he was a eugenicist (which is BS), what does that have to do with economics? Truth is Ron Paul is clearly a racist, but he is still (sadly) the best choice for president. The fact of the matter is that Ayn Rand is a hateful person who has a hateful club of people who want to pretend as though they were smart. A philosophy of selfishness is as needed (and as intellectually stimulating) as a philosophy of lust.
Well maybe I speak too badly of the hedonists.
ThatBlackPanda 2 months ago
Comment removed
jgarber72 2 months ago
@ThatBlackPanda @ThatBlackPanda He's clearly racist.
"A system designed to protect individual liberty will have no punishments for any group and no privileges. Today, I think inner-city folks and minorities are punished unfairly in the war on drugs. For instance, Blacks make up 14% of those who use drugs, yet 36 percent of those arrested are Blacks and it ends up that 63% of those who finally end up in prison are Blacks.
jgarber72 2 months ago
"For federal purposes, I no longer believe in the death penalty. I believe it has been issued unjustly. If you're rich, you get away with it; if you're poor and you're from the inner city, you're more likely to be prosecuted and convicted."
Yeah, he's racist.
jgarber72 2 months ago 14
@jgarber72
Oh good... Ron Paul quotes in support of Black People... sort of.
Look, I can tell you quotes from Stalin that support political dissidence but it is late and I would not like you to feel as though pulling quotes earn you any prestige in this debate.
I will say this however, Ron Paul does speak truth.
He is not one to lie even though he (allegedly) dislikes minorities.
Which is why he is the best choice for president... and is also a racist.
IDK what else you want me to say.
ThatBlackPanda 2 months ago
He's (sadly) the best choice? If you think it's "sad" that he wants to end wars and all foreign entanglements (which affects lower income and minorities more than any others) then you're right. If you think it's "sad" he wants to end the war on drugs (which put minorities in prison at a great rate than whites) then you're right.
jgarber72 2 months ago
@jgarber72
He is good on somethings... but he is still insane (but honest).
He is sadly the best choice because it shows how far our system has fell since Clinton.
Never before has everyone been so clearly bought in the presidential election.
The lies use to be hard to spot.
It is so bad that I, a progressive, have to side with a crazy ass libertarian due to everyone else being part of the same system. He want's to go back to the Gold standard... seriously dude... the gold standard.
ThatBlackPanda 2 months ago
@ThatBlackPanda
Let's see, I can verify Ron Paul actually said these things, as opposed to the twenty year old, unproven "newsletter" that keeps creeping around only when he is doing well in the polls. Otherwise, he's simply ignored.
Throwing around the term racist at someone without proof, when in fact the opposite can be proven, is intellectually lazy and not really worth my response. So just ignore this and go back believing everything you see, hear, or read without verifying. SHEEP....
jgarber72 2 months ago
@jgarber72
Back in 2008 is when I made my decision about RP being a racist.
(My personal view is that not all republicans are racist... but all racists are republican lol)
Ron Paul has too much evidence stacked against him for me to believe he is not a racist. And yet despite his racism... he is still the best candidate.
Lyndon B Johnson was clearly a racist and he did great things for Blacks, that is not the end all be all to a person. It is just a huge factor.
Hell Gandhi was racist too.
ThatBlackPanda 2 months ago
@ThatBlackPanda "Rand's book was written out of pure hate."Interestingly enough I have a paperback copy though I've not read more than the notes at the back. Do you mean Rand wrote it as a kind of rant against the world because it wouldn't accord with her emotionally hurt and damaged personality? Perhaps she had low self-esteem and reflected this in a degree of misanthropy, no? yes?
jontycampbell 1 week ago
So, they are realizing that the obsession with selfishness and personal wealth is falling out of favor, and trying to form an ad-hoc argument that associates themselves with the prevailing trend in popular thought. That's fine. I just hope people can understand that these suddenly-progressive movements are opportunistic followers, so they can ignore them. We should continue forming our own ideas, sharing our thoughts and experiences, as we have already been doing.
sevenslimysnails 2 months ago
@sevenslimysnails so you've clearly never read a word of Rand. Why even comment?
People who actually know what they're talking about know that every character in Atlas shared one trait: a love of PRODUCTIVITY. Quite to the contrary all disdained money, a result of those who sought it dishonestly. Like in reality, these people are politicians, academics, and society's hangers on.
So what is this "prevailing trend in popular thought"? I love the smell of BS in the morning...
BoxScientific 2 months ago
@BoxScientific No need for hostility. Rand explicitly said her philosophy was about the moral superiority of selfishness. You can love and interpret her book how ever you want, no one is stopping you, but people are starting to lose interest in validating their own emotions. If you really believe Rand just wanted everyone to be productive, then be happy knowing that this is a generally accepted principle, so her philosophy doesn't need spreading.
sevenslimysnails 2 months ago
@sevenslimysnails what you try to pass for logic is pop trash. "People are starting to lose faith in validating their emotions". This is a statement of what? Fact? Truth? Logic? I DO believe in the moral superiority of selfishness, I figured it out long before I ever heard of Rand, and I never sold them out for the meaningless type of pop trash you're talking. You want to deny that these philosophies haven't been defeated by yours in 50+ years but you can't. So sorry...
BoxScientific 2 months ago
@BoxScientific
Belief != fact. Objectivism lays out zero sound epistemology. I doubt you could either.
That's not to say left-progressivism is the answer, but Objectivism is pure idealism. Most of it hasn't been "proven wrong" because it's NOT PHILOSOPHY to even be taken that seriously. Behavioral econ easily refutes her faux economic principles.
ephekt420 2 months ago
@BoxScientific I'm afraid I must disagree.
sevenslimysnails 2 months ago
Isn’t it loltastic that people keep associating neo-con values with this channel, a LIBERTARIAN one?
thinking fail.
jonescomplete 3 months ago
@jonescomplete Neo-cons value protectionism. Libertarians value self-reliance and honest trade.
jaeLAX23 2 months ago
Hahaha, I can't believe that there's a major political movement based around the ramblings of a self-admitted sociopath like Ayn Rand.
dark7element 3 months ago
@dark7element Well Picasso, Dali, and Eisenstein also led quite peculiar personal lives. We all know they never amounted to much....Try reading sometime, you just might learn something.....
flopress 3 months ago
I could write a book about how much I hate ayn rand. I think I'd call it "atlas shat and felt better about himself". ready for some ad hominem? Rand was preachy, pretentious and a bad wife. Thats right, she loved attention and getting fucked by people behind her husbands back, who supported her, while extolling the virtues of greed.
MrBaldurthegood 3 months ago
No, I don't particularly want to live in a world where liberty has been traded away for equality and security, but since that kind of world has never existed, it is not really a relevant question for me. The poor, the weak, and the sick have never had equality or security. Neither, however, do I want to live in Rand's ideal world, where Reardan Metals is free to in innovate and thrive, but where that freedom also allows Reardan to freely pollute and ruin the planet for temporary profit.
daokuk 3 months ago
@daokuk Perhaps Reardon Metals is less polluting than 3rd world metal? If we regulate it enough, we can make it too expensive, and 3rd World Metals will take over market share, and "cleaner" Reardon will be out of business. As so often is the case today. Outsourcing? To China? Never heard of it? Think China is CLEANER? Go ahead! raise those costs here, every way you can think of! Taxes, regulations, EPA, Lawsuits, healthcare, 10 minute breaks, gay bathrooms, free tampons.
luvcheney1 2 months ago
@luvcheney1 You are right, perhaps Reardon Metals would be cleaner. Perhaps though if Reardon prospers in our hypothetical unregulated Randian world, then Reardan's competitors would be forced to cut corners and could in response use processes that would be polluting or dangerous. As often occurs today, even with some regulations.
As a side query, what's wrong with ten minute breaks?
daokuk 2 months ago
@daokuk Free Market advocates desire laws. Laws protecting private property, enforcing contracts, personal safety. Dangerous pollution is bad, but civil liability, lawsuits, create a path to justice, and discourage bad behavior. Dangerous conditions also solved the same way. Laws. Regulators are not effective. Note the Corzine issue of MF Global. CFTC is the regulator. Nice job. BP was regulated. Nice job.
luvcheney1 2 months ago
@luvcheney1 I do agree that regulators are not effective. But I don't believe the legal system can handle the amount of litigation required to ‘police’ a free market. Most people, especially where profit is involved, are not that honest and there would be too many cases to attend to. But you and I will never agree, really. I have a lot more negative view about where ‘civilization’ has led us and think more of the same will bring even more suffering.
daokuk 2 months ago
@daokuk You do realize that the world is supporting a far higher population than was ever thought possible in the past? Which simply means a far higher level of productivity than ever believed possible. For many 1000`s of years, people worked 16 hrs a day in agriculture, their kids too, in backbreaking labor, just to eek out a basic means of survival, and it was very tenuous. This still is the case for billions. We can afford leisure, pleasure. That was impossible for the masses, before
luvcheney1 2 months ago
@luvcheney1 And these peasants who worked so hard had rulers living in palaces who could feed every single one of them and allow them a more leisurely lifestyle. Technology has given the modern peasant an upgrade, but only because we are not the slave classes of the 3rd world. What is modern leisure and pleasure? Shopping at the mall, watching movies and eating junk food (all mind control).
hathorrox 1 month ago
@hathorrox Banal happiness is not necessarily immoral, it can be moral as a form of satisfaction of the human condition. Some people are simply fine with simple lives and voluntarily lead them, others are anxious and like to connect to more people, create more things, and participate in society to greater degrees. However, I think the current safety net system encourages more people to be lazy than otherwise. It takes less income these days to participate in those simple addicting luxuries.
MadPutz 1 month ago
@MadPutz Why does it matter if it's moral or immoral? That's all based on the current religious and popular stance anyway. The speaker says Ayn Rand argues that being allowed to compete against others makes the individual more prosperous and creative. I'm arguing that it does not. It only makes them miserable with a status to hide behind. On the other hand, using a new material to help build railroads in underdeveloped countries would make someone happy.
hathorrox 1 month ago
@hathorrox So because of the lulling effect of the safety net, certain people who do little may not recognize what they can gain from a higher plane of activity and community engagement and doing business/research/creativity/charity whatever
MadPutz 1 month ago
@hathorrox The "slave classes of the 3rd world" in China have seen their real wages increase 7-fold since the liberation of the economy in the enterprise zones. Your leisure is up to you what you do with it. I still am able to actually find books.
luvcheney1 1 month ago
@luvcheney1 Good information on China, do you have a source for this? (Helps when I discuss free markets with people)
Norie92 1 month ago
"David Dollar World Bank Country Director,China has been most rapidly growing economy in world over past 25 yrs. Growth has led to an extraordinary increase in real living standards and to an unprecedented decline in poverty. World Bank estimates more than 60% of population living under $1 per day poverty line at start of economic reform. That poverty headcount ratio had declined to 10% by 2004, indicating that about 500 million people have been lifted out of poverty in a generation."
luvcheney1 1 month ago
@luvcheney1 Thanks, I found the PDF document supporting this on the Worldbank site.
Norie92 1 month ago
@Norie92 You`re welcome.
luvcheney1 1 month ago
@daokuk Part 2). OOOPS! Forgot the 10 minute breaks. Nothing is wrong with 10 min breaks, I guess. Except people smoke on them, eat, drink coffee, etc. Then 20 min later need to take a shit, pee, and need another 10 min break, they used the other one to play Angry Birds. How do you tell an employee NOT to go shit? And how can you tell him NOT to take a 10 min break, when law requires it? So, he gets several, which raises costs. Which, you pay when you buy product there.
luvcheney1 2 months ago
@daokuk Pollution....that's your big debate about a fictional world?!? Wow.
evilbert81 2 months ago
@evilbert81 Not sure that I understand your comment, but sure, having a viable planet to live on, fictional or not, would be a priority for me.
daokuk 1 month ago
Yeah, but was Rand ever in Playboy magazine?
I rest my case!
harpo103 3 months ago
@harpo103 She didn't pose, she wrote articles and did interviews.
The one excuse for reading it was "I read it for the articles."
That used to be valid, because they had a variety of articles and were labeled as a "Gentleman's Magazine."
Then Hustler became popular for simply being cover-to-cover pornography, and Playboy followed suit.
CrOeDdE 3 months ago
great lesson!
nilma99 3 months ago
@MrNance91
She is a pretty woman, but why do you have to eat her cat? You have cat fetish?
enestbox 3 months ago
All Rand wanted to do, was to get the conversation started about the existing of God, meaning she didn't believe in God. She was an Atheist and a Jew. Most of her work was just smoke and mirrors for that point. Was she a capitalist?: Who knows for sure, she couldn't very well write books back then that were anti capitalism and anti God, could she?! American Society back then would have run her out of town back then...right?!
AnimalBlackmatism 3 months ago
@AnimalBlackmatism
Derp.
Soupflakez 3 months ago
Free Markets = Capitalism! WTF is that feminist liberal talking about!!
AnimalBlackmatism 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ayn rand was instructed to write "atlas shrugged" by Phillip Rotschild..... She was also his mistress.... EVIL!!!!!
McCullough227 3 months ago
Prof. Burns: " There's a debate as to where to place Rand in the American Intellectual / Political Tradition." I'll tell you where to place her... Place her in the garbage bin! Atlas Shrugged is one of the most transcendently awful novels I've ever read. The characters in the novel were so wooden the text could be cut with a chainsaw! If you have a genuine love of literature, and have enjoyed great authors (Melville, Twain, George Eliot) don't wade through Rand's schlock novel, life's too short!
CosmicFork 3 months ago
@CosmicFork you must not know what the word literature means. Rand created an amazing world with her words. Although I think The Fountainhead was better then Atlas Shrugged. Sure her main characters were very rigid and non changing, but they had to be. That is how they were to show their strength.
KORreaper 3 months ago
@KORreaper are you fucking kidding me i read all the way through anthem and the last 2 chapters is the main character ranting about how amazing he is. she is not a good writer she is horrible. explain to me how she is a good writer
httm241 3 months ago
@httm241 anthem was terrible. it was like second person wasn't it? But i don't care about anthem i'm talking "Atlas shrugged" and "The Fountainhead" Those were very well written and really fun to read. I liked a lot of her descriptions and attention to small details. Although I wish she hadn't talked about music like the reader could actually hear it.
KORreaper 3 months ago
Objectivism is just an excuse to be a selfish asshole!
CosmicFork 3 months ago
@CosmicFork That's why I like it. lol
mcdonalds411 3 months ago
Disagree, liberal thought focuses more on collectivism instead of individualism. The further left that you move, the more controls are placed on people through government. Free markets are directly opposed to liberalism. Liberalism mandates government intervention at first, and then government control as the end. This video is a lot of spin, in trying to link Rand to liberals. In truth, both Democrats and Republicans are working towards the same world government, which is what Rand warned.
Paladine71 3 months ago
@Paladine71 Look up classical liberalism maybe?
666or999 3 months ago
Oh my god no. I don't want to live in the world of Atlas Shrugged. Because Rand had no clue, because she was an egotist, hack, sociopath, and in the world of ideas, a whore. Because the world of the totally empowered individual that Rand envisioned does exist, and it's in Somalia, in Mogadishu, in rural Afghanistan, wherever brutal dictators flourish without the limitations of English rule of law, contract rights and the rights of man. Profit and power, always, before people.
smith930 3 months ago
@smith930 you do realize that one of Rand's "laws" with her philosophy is that no one is to use force to control other, only when threatened with force. Although I can't remember if that was a literal force like violence, or any force like political influence.
KORreaper 3 months ago
I like Jennifer Burns a lot more than I like Rand.
rooleybbq 3 months ago
The true sign of failure in an ideology is when it has to be subsidized. The most heavily subsidized ideologies in the history of the world are the Catholic Church and Libertarianism. They could not survive the freemarket place of ideas unless there was massive financial backing behind their propaganda machines. They each make about as much sense as Scientology and Marxism! This video was uploaded by learnliberty, & (IHS) funded by Koch Family Foundation, Oil, Gas and Chemical Conglomerates!
CosmicFork 3 months ago
Your proof?
scienceatheism 3 months ago
"There's a debate as to where to place Rand in the American Intellectual/ Political tradition." I agree with americanmuslimgirl, "Place her in the garbage bin!" To professional philosophers, Rand is a longstanding joke. The real crux of her idiotic ideas is her notion of "ethical egoism," that what people ought to do (morally) is promote their own individual interests exclusively. That means we all ought to be selfish, all the time, needless to say, her arguments for this position are ludicrous!
CosmicFork 3 months ago
@CosmicFork k, so should I throw away her books before or after I read them.
MutantBamHammer 2 months ago
@MutantBamHammer You'll probably want to pitch it in the dumpster after the first couple of chapters... But, I'll let you be the judge yourself. I'm trying to imagine how anyone could wade through all 1,170 pages of Atlas Shrugged. I found the characters in the book to be so wooden the text could be cut with a chainsaw. The book makes a good doorstop for my bedroom door though... keeps it open, even when the cat rubbs against it... but, I'll send it to ya, if you want...the book, that is...
CosmicFork 2 months ago
Objectivism: Fuck people, Get money!
1337Ravage 3 months ago
I can tell you where to place her. You can place her in the garbage bin. She was utterly simplistic, ridiculously racist, a self-hating woman, a horrible wife, a horrible friend, and very naive. Her characters don't exist in the real world. The only people who think her characters are possible in this world are pimply teenagers who haven't done enough thinking of their own yet, so they happily hand their brains to a simplistic ideologue who makes the whole world starkly black and white for them.
americanmuslimgirl 3 months ago
Atlas Shrugged was a masterpiece?
If that's the case, some of the doodles I do on napkins at the pub must be high art!
grimcity 3 months ago
@Seabeck32 the EPA gives folks a false sense of security in my opinion. A clean environment is a scientific challenge. Therefore it requires a technological, not political, solution. Every day that we believe we are helping the environment by voting for a certain candidate, liking a certain Facebook page, wearing a certain color wristband, etc is a day we ruin the environment through our collective inaction. EPA or no, we are each responsible for and derive value from a clean environment. Thanks
imyjimmy 3 months ago
yeah even Rand's characters exist within a corporate "framework" lol ...they are "free " to be individuals. But yet they are suspicious of the government "framework"...lol, and they are not free. just another way of saying, im a greedy motherfucker and i am exempt from the rule of law through the corporate "framework." I guess that's called "corporate individuality" ha ha ha ha ha. its also an oxymoron. Rand is a oxy-MORON. Love that logic sexylady...Burns I mean.
bullshit3118 3 months ago
If a business is pollution the air, people of the neighborhood could sue them the same way that you could sue another neighbor who is dumping garbage in your backyard. I still don't see why we need a government agency to allow the businesses to pollute... they should not be allowed to pollute at all.
grapezrgood 4 months ago
Where to place Ayn Rand in the philosophical tradition is in the trash heap
kokopelli314 4 months ago
Crony capitalism is bad, agreed. But completely unregulated capitalism is arguably worse. I like to use the analogy of football. Without the referees the game would inevitably descend into chaos and violence without rules and enforcers of those rules. But the referees MUST be impartial and solely focused on maximizing the competition and quality of the game. You cannot have referees personally gaining from the outcomes of matches.
justncase80 4 months ago
@justncase80 You are describing the current situation.Violence would not result in football because it would destroy the context of the game. People behave much better because of self interest as opposed to threat of force. And referees are never impartial in the absence of accountability for their decisions, hence our current situation.
LordShandor 4 months ago
"So Rand is saying that [...] you don't really have objective rule of law. You have subjective laws that pass when certain people are more connected with the government. And are able to use the government for competitive advantage in the workplace."
Wow, sounds exactly like how politicians are bought off by huge corporations today.
mechadamuramu 4 months ago 18
Ayn Rand was a sociopathic-moron who thought she could survive on her own genius but when cancer threatened to wipe out the little bit of wealth she managed to put away for her old age she changed her name and applied for welfare benefits. The queen of the Libertarians, a stupid bitch preaching to the ignorant. She had a modicum of success on her own but like other so called self made successes, when she failed, she quickly turned to the state to keep her ass off the street.
logtype47 4 months ago
@logtype47 :If you had something to say, it was lost in garbled vindictive.
I have never heard of any charges of welfare fraud by Ms Rand, until your post.
part380 4 months ago
@part380 define welfare.
logtype47 4 months ago
@logtype47 You brought it up, my friend.
part380 4 months ago
I like having a government agency that monitors pollution. Seems like a good idea.
Saebeck32 4 months ago 31
@Saebeck32 What about the other agencies?
SkepticThink 3 months ago
@SkepticThink I like having the FAA making sure our planes are safe, FDA making sure our food is safe, a military to protect us, police and fireman to protect us, i like having public roads, bridges and parks. I like knowing I will have some basic security in my old age, even if my savings evaporate in the wall street casino. I don't mind paying basic taxes to enjoy all these benefits to society.
Saebeck32 3 months ago
@Saebeck32
Well, they stop being basic taxes when the agencies grow to thousands of workers and their budget grows steadily. But even if they were basic taxes, is the US better with or without these agencies?
You're looking at the positives without the negatives. The FDA also blocks many drugs that could save a ton of lives, so in effect the FDA indirectly kills many people as well. Local police and firemen aren't federal groups. What about the department of commerce, do you think it's good?
SkepticThink 3 months ago
@SkepticThink The US is better with these agencies. Would you rather return to the 1800's when pollution was rampant, snake oil was sold as a cure-all and life expectancy was 46. Also, taxes are at their lowest rate in 50 years!! Even lower than Reagan, that socialist.
Saebeck32 3 months ago
@Saebeck32 That's a Straw Man argument. I never said I want to return to the 1800's. Be logical please.
SkepticThink 3 months ago
@Saebeck32 oh noes government regulations ruin my profit quick to the bomb shelter b4 its too late
httm241 3 months ago
@Saebeck32 You're wrong, here's why: Take for example, rBST, an additive given to dairy cows to increase milk production. You'll noticed that it is *very* seldomly still used on dairy cows, and most milk you purchase (that isn't Hy-Top brand) is labelled as being rBST-free. The milk-producers abandonned rBST because their consumers doubted its safety and complained. If we, the consumers, refuse to to purchase products we deem unworthy of our effort, the producers will conform to us.
DomeSwag 2 months ago
Ayn Rand is the intellectual playground of 15 year old boys.
jonblaze32 4 months ago 2
@jonblaze32
she's better than that.
flawed but useful.
tubub 4 months ago
@ignbtd If you made a similar argument for Brett Easton Ellis, I might agree with you. Ayn Rand, however, demonstrated in numerous interviews that she was as dull as the characters in her books. She was humorless and not the most clever person. I don't think there was a "design" to her work. She only communicated to the best her abilities.
whbon73 4 months ago
@oolong2 That is that these laws, and a few others like them, guarantee that to prosper you must give other people what they want, and otherwise leave them alone. The free market, unless you're talking to an anarchist, is not about the market itself being free, but of all individuals being free to operate within and according to the market. That is the basis of all human prosperity. Because humans who are free, are productive, and productivity is the whole point of the study of economics.
eggory 5 months ago
You mean do I want to live in a world of one-dimensional characters and inane dialogue? I'll pass.
whbon73 5 months ago 48
@whbon73 So true. it is amazing how selfish people can be. Rand promotes this to the masses. Burns buy's into it because she knows where the money is. It's all about money in the end, until we imagine a brighter future without it.
bullshit3118 3 months ago
This would be great if Atlas Shrugged was any good. It was political muckraking written by a hack, who, because she was a vocal, opinionated woman in a male dominated field, has been idolized. There are many female political philosophers with better ideas who are being overshadowed by Rand.
theclash06013 5 months ago
yeah, and you know whats hotter? the shit coming out of her mouth. Rand was a woman that didn't really believe this philosophy--she w as a philosophical hackjob. She lived in a dreamworld surrounded by elitist, spoiled rotten "individualists" that could afford the masses into slavery so they can be "liberal". Like Mill, Rand is full of shit because "free markets" do not exist in a hierarchical monetary capitalist system. Elites are "free" to use markets and control them. Atlas took a big shit.
bullshit3118 5 months ago
@bullshit3118 What do you call that stuff coming out of your mouth?? You sound like a damned ten-year-old.
eggory 5 months ago
@eggory I dont care for debate etiquette with this childish propaganda for dimwits like yourself. Everyone is sick and tired of this An Rand bullshit. She was a female spokeswomen for the men in charge. They liked her because she espoused insanity at the expensive of the masses. here's another ten year old comment: Eat shit. :)
bullshit3118 4 months ago
@bullshit3118 Is it insecurity that drives you to pretend that everyone agrees with you? Why don't you just speak for yourself. All you damned socialists are always trolling every video about capitalism telling everybody what 'everybody knows'. It's a joke. There is a serious debate going on but you systematically refuse to acknowledge that it has two sides, with your head buried in the sand.
eggory 3 months ago
@eggory it is blab blah blah vblah.....blah blah blah blah...you fucking selfish little rat. you dont even know what the fuck socialism means you turd bucket. Do you know what corporate welfare is asshole? hows that for state sponsored tax payer funding monies going into banker salaries and bonuses? Deny it all you want, you're kind is going down. Ann Rand is a junior intellectual and welathy man's sweet little sister. this government is gonna get some goddamned regulation and your gonna know it
bullshit3118 3 months ago
@bullshit3118 Ad hominem attacks don't get you anywhere. Corporate welfare is state intervention. Corporations shouldn't exist at all, they are nothing but, shields for an individual, or groups of individuals, to protect themselves, and their property, from the mistakes they make. The government regulations caused the problem, we have a broken banking system set up by the government. Our country was fought for, by people who hated centralized banks, now we have a monster of one. Go figure.
asleeperj 3 months ago
@bullshit3118 Socialism, communism, fascism, are all just different forms of oligarchy. They put the planning of the many in the hands of the few. The power should come from the individual, and not some fraudulent government.
asleeperj 3 months ago
@asleeperj yeah just like Oligarchies. the individual. the few running the show. you are an utter idiot! my god...lol
bullshit3118 3 months ago
@bullshit3118 The way the US was designed was to be planned by the many, and not by the few. The federal government was not supposed to be as powerful as it is, the most important thing to a person politically, was that of city counsel, and not what happens 3,000 miles away. See, i warned you about ad hominem attacks, you should work on them. They are a sign of a losing argument.
asleeperj 3 months ago
@asleeperj Firstly, the U.S. was not designed to be for the many. technically its a constitutional republic--look it up on wikipedia if you dont feel like reading about it. Youare thinking of the "American Dream" ideology, which is a lie in a monetary system.James Madison and George Washington wanted a single party thats why they created the federal government--read the Federalist papers, will ya? You are a high school debater, you dont even know your own history. ad hominem yourself.
bullshit3118 3 months ago