Added: 6 months ago
From: 1957Atlas
Views: 54,300
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (273)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I saw the movie, I'm reading the book and i'm almost finished, and both the movie and the book are great. I also hope to see parts 2 and 3 in theaters. I also hope that every socialist, communist, facist, collectivist, altruist, liberal, left-libertarian, and the occupy movement just fuckin drop dead.

  • What is it with American documentaries and their bloody movie soundtracks?

  • Maybe to understand the theme of Atlas Shrugged we should look to the past more than the future. The book is set in a dystopian America where the government attempt to impose socialism on the people and make the country one of the "People's States", but this happened for real in the author's native Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution, or coup to be more accurate. Not that I'm saying that the book's message is therefore less important.

  • all the best bro not sure if you've read the books or not i'll admit it's a lot to ask of anyone including me but not because, philosophy a side, that the books aren't beatifully written cuz they are she can require it requires a lot at times and atlas being approxmtly 1100 pgs reads more like 1500 pgs at times but i'm better off for it, and i don't agree w/all she's about i would never wish for any of our protected habitat to be constructed upon and a few others. but 98% ish w/the core 'Y'

  • @rsbarrett4991 Good reply. That's the kind of challenging retorts I respect. The ones that make me re-evaluate my limited thoughts. Thanks for not going off the deep end and giving the usual youtuber shittalking. I am now inspired to look into her philosophy more thoroughly now. thanks.

  • if one organ begins to falter the others cannot compromise themselves to rescue it becuz then you would have not only the one organ originally faltering now the others are operating at less than optimum level, it would only lead a competent physician to think your body is begening to shut down but if the others continue to operate at top level in an uncompromising manner than it remains just the one problem that needs fixing

  • after having defined the pertinent terms first: epistimiology, objectivism, subjectivism, altruism, metaphysiology and a few others that escape me at the moment... i first read 'romantic manifesto' which i am glad i did because i think it helped make 'atlas shrugged' make so much more sense and mean so much more you cannot help others if you are not putting yourself first bill gates, w. buffet and ted turner could not give billions to charity w/out their original selfish quests

  • Imagine if every organ in your body proclaimed to be more important than the others. Your body would malfunction because each organ would go off doing it's own thing. This is analogous to the current state of society, and that is the type of philosophy ayn rand pushed towards; anti-collectivism.

  • @shamelessfootfucker my man, sorry about any offense, i mean this purely in the sake of respectful communication becuz u just stumbled upon an analogy i'm jealous i hadn't. you disproved your logic and proved a.rands, if by total accident, doesn't matter, i'm more interested in what you think is right and just and what you think of my next post

  • @shamelessfootfucker each organ does act as if it's the most vital, it must do it's job and it's job alone, to the best of it's ability the other organs are relying on it or you become ill, rands clearly said private funding should always be gifted to less fortunate.she's opposed to altruism by definition; unconditional and unquestioned giving of ones self when the expense can't be afforded. for body to operate at top level the organs need to act selfishly for the sake of harmony and function

  • bovine.

    

  • I find that most who dismiss Ayn Rand’s morality don’t really understand it. Her “selfishness” is long-term, principled self-interest. People are a combination of the physical and mental, and your self-interest includes psychological values. Self-interest is not to be reduced to only the physical, such as money. Other people can be of tremendous psychological value (i.e. friends, lovers, children.) Rand recognized that benevolence toward strangers is in one’s own interest, in a free country.

  • @SwordOfApollo Ayn Rand morality was dishonesty. She hid the fact that she collected Social Security and Medicare. The height of selfishness is to not live with integrity.

  • @miraclelurker its a such a shame people like u exist & if i explained it id have to wait for u to become more intelligent for u to get it, its far easier to have u shot & let God deal with ur kind.

  • Comment removed

  • @miraclelurker Why was this anyone else's business? The fact that she advocated against SS and Medicare and also received benefits does not make her hypocritical. She was *forced by government* to pay into the system, and it is not hypocritical to get a portion of that stolen money back in the form of benefits. You don't fight robbers by refusing to take your money back when they steal it.

  • @miraclelurker i'm not certain of your claim so i'll just take your word for it that what u wrote is accurate, but rand clearly stated in mike wallace interview that people are nearly never given the choice to specifics of policy on subsidised programs and leave people in the dark regarding specifics,ex:900pg obama care dumped on laps weeknd before vote, do we have a say in it's implementation or access to initiating changes or modifications? no. u make best of what u've been force fed

  • @SwordOfApollo u amase mee u say wat i sed as gud abouwt beeeing smal mindeed & then u comit the same crime in critzing my gramer, but i cant help people like u ur a genetic cul de sac btw the grammatical errors are to help u along with ur slow death

  • @SwordOfApollo well put.good will to men is MOST misunderstood Rand idea. acts of good will are EARNED by both parties.ex: boss decides he has time to give a lift to his employee waiting for a bus to night school after long work-day, buys him a cup of coffee along the way (boss earned the leisure for such acts, employee earned the respect for the act) employee neither asked or expected; mutually exclusive relationship amongst happy, striving men. Rand never advocated ill will or isolationism

  • Her philosophy of anti aultruistic individualism is what lead to this ecenomic problem in the first place. I.e. Every politician thinking of him/her selfe first. Ya a woman thinking objectively, what a laugh.

  • @shamelessfootfucker That has to be the dumbest thing I ever heard. Do you understand her philosophy at all? I don't think you do or else you would've never said that its her philosophy that caused all the problemas the world economy is in. If you had the slightest idea of what she ment you would know that she is completely against all the politicians and rich industrialists that use favors and lobbying to get what they want.

  • chispa33 shamefootfucker is actually a decent and well reasoning guy by his decision to read and consider others thoughts and ideas. i tried the berating approach which works 0/10 times and felt guilty for the juvenile jabs which only exposes my weaknesses, so, needing no praise, but in concern for his misplaced ideas about rand i used reason and logic and got the response i hoped he would come to for his benefit. and u r absolutely 100% correct w/what u wrote about rands view of politicians

  • @chispa33 i read people almost never change their steadfastly held views by opposing arguments in person, oddly when the personal is eliminated, and the same opposing arguments r read in privacy, acceptance shoots to 95% of the time. it's considered a triumph of their own work to have read, reasoned and accepted a new view, unfortuntly, in person it's taken as an attack on their value system establshd by their life exprnces and shames felt and they shouldn't, hence verbal assaults

  • @chispa33 if u read our posts (footfckrs and mine) on the 1st and 2nd pgs he came around, maybe realized he needs to read the books (as anyone should before commenting) to fully understand and grasp the concretely rooted and supported concepts as they should be understood. i'm guessing u read atlas? before atlas, reading objectivism and romantic manifesto IMO serve people better to understand the depth of the story of atlas (the meaning within the meaning of the charachters dialogue and actions

  • @shamelessfootfucker i hope you can overcome your challenged state and learn to learn...

    shamelessfotfucker...? eh, wow! that is a really neat name... you are obviously very smart

  • @shamelessfootfucker and yes i'm aware it is 'foot'... becuz u would be new enuf to correct spelling on posts

  • @rsbarrett4991 No typos don't bother me. If I let that bother me I would be like you, insulting someone for having a strange name, focusing on the trivial little things instead of the main point. That's vrey objective of you.

  • JayGatsby You"HEARD" the movie flopped? Well it didn't and those of us in the struggle against the overreach of and powergrabs by this admin are waiting for parts 2&3. You must've misinterpreted her words.

  • I read Atlas Shrugged. I really like it when Dagny Taggart told Hank Rearden that it was going "to cost him" to fuck her. lol. I heard the movie really flopped. According to Rand's philosophy, the movie should be extinct, right?  The public didn't buy it so the movie and ideas are wrong, right?

  • havent seen this, but does it cover the parts in her life that go against everything she claimed was truth, like being a homewrecker, going on government assisstance when she got sick?

  • Added to Libertarian International Organization twitter. See article on her at their website.

  • I don't understand something, the movie trailer seems to be stating that mercantilism had a lot to do with the financial crisis "..Under Bush 50,000 regulations were put in place..." (or words to that effect, but didn't the 2008 financial crisis happen due to no regulations as stated in the Ferguesons movie the Inside Job? i'm sorry, I'm confused and would like someone to clarify this.

  • @Australiano75 Good point. Days after the crisis and just before the Bernie Madoff arrest the SEC said that it wasn't enforcing anti-fraud rules. The shows problem is that in the many regulations simple justice is blocked while they help people with agendas. The deeper cause of the crisis IMHO was the war, anti-immigration plus the Bush stealth tax rise and inflation though: the dollar lost 30% and taxes went up 30% in decade...Most Libs saw what was coming; I headed for the exits in 2006.

  • @RalphKSwanson Thanks Ralph, I will be using some of these points that you've mentioned in my last semester essay. I'm actually writing about the global financial crisis. The movie Inside Job was a good starting point, other data is always a must here. I have also done a presentation before at my university about the decline of the US, I use Paul Kennedy's theory about how empires spend to much maintaining bases abroad.

  • @Australiano75 Yeah, I believe police states also tend to tank economies, as they have huge costs and dont generate any revenue just like an empire does. Ive heard it said that for marine mollusks that growing a shell is the last stage of their evolution before they go extinct, and I see a nice paralell with a totalitarian state.

  • @RalphKSwanson Thanks Ralph, I will be using some of these points that you've mentioned in my last semester essay. I'm actually writing about the global financial crisis. The movie Inside Job was a good starting point, other data is always a must here. I have also done a presentation before at my university about the decline of the US, I use Paul Kennedy's theory about how empires spend to much maintaining bases abroad.

  • Went to the screening last night!! Great documentary!  I want more...

  • Ayn Rand was light years ahead of her time.

    ~Chris

    Norfolk, VA

  • Prophecy is a terrible word to associate with Ayn Rand. This, people, is repetition of history.

  • Society will thrive until people can vote themselves other peoples money.

  • And who wanted that government intervention? Wall Street.

    Washington, D.C. is full of clowns, but it's Wall Street that owns the circus. 

  • i didn't mean 'common good' in any abstract sense. i meant whatever the individual at the time considers it to be (like u say with the soldier jumping on the grenade to save his friends)

    & i don't think the greatest evils have been perpertrated for the 'common good'. only what some people might call 'the common good' at the time, which is nothing of the sort. just words they use to disguise their true intent

    which is usually a grab for land, power, or other stuff like that

    imo

  • Hiraghm: "I wanna fight everybody, Mankind is the best thing this universe has to offer, second only to chop liver."

    I knew someone who wanted to fight everybody once, lets just say he didnt win.

    Know thy weaknesses, accept them, find a way to overcome them, WITH or WITHOUT human intervention. If you worship your own kind's strength and ignore your flaws, your flaws will overcome your strength, sooner or later.

  • Why is she sorry? Allen Greenspan should be sorry.

  • "The simplest form of moral behavior occurs when a man or other animal fights for his own survival. Do not belittle such behavior as being merely selfish. Of course it is selfish. . .but selfishness is the bedrock on which all moral behavior starts and it can be immoral only when it conflicts with a higher moral imperative." - Heinlein

  • " An animal so poor in spirit that he won't even fight on his own behalf is already an evolutionary dead end; the best he can do for his breed is to crawl off and die, and not pass on his defective genes." - Heinlein (from "Pragmatics of Patriotism")

  • @Hiraghm

    Personal attack? Out of nowhere for no apparent reason? Oh jolly, from which cave did Sir Troll crawled out from? LMAO. Instead of picking cherries from miniscule authors like they are GOD's irrefutable words, why dont you try putting in some of your OWN analysis.

  • @TheLamelyNamed - Heinlein... miniscule? He was one of the most famous science fiction authors. A contemporary of Asimov. This is from a speech he made at the Naval academy.

    I already shared my thinking on the subject. Evidently you were incapable of understanding it.

    There are two kinds of people in the world; those who believe in Man, and those who don't.The former tend to be individualists, the latter collectivists.

    I don't know where you get "personal attack" from.

  • Isaac Asimov once said, if we can create a machine that could take in and process a huge amount of socioeconomic data and outputs the most efficient, logical, scientific methods of administrating a nation and have a human committee filter and implement them, we would have the most efficient government possible, minus the human corruption and bias.

    But no arrogant prideful politician would EVER let this happen, because it will strip them of their power and wealth.

    Man cannot rule man.

  • Man cannot rule man, at least not efficiently and without consequences. Man can SEE logic and science but WILL NOT devote their existence to them because it will take away their "god given right" to hoard wealth and power. No scientists with their logical minds and scientific rules of governance will be permitted to become the president. You will NEVER see someone with Albert Einstein's mind running a nation.

  • @TheLamelyNamed - Wrong. Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and many other of the Founding Fathers had brilliant minds.

    But, a freakish talent for mathematics does not make one fit to rule a nation. That takes wisdom.

  • Humanity is shallow, pathetic and arrogant. All of its troubles can be EASILY defined in two phrases.

    1. Satisfying their base instincts.

    2. Emotional Individualism that defies all logic, reason and scientific methods of efficiency.

    People cannot shrug off their base instincts and emotions, they HAVE to satisfy them, even if it will lead them off a cliff, its humanity's inherent genetic flaw, the evil illogical dictator behind your subconscious mind.

  • @TheLamelyNamed - I disagree. Mankind is capable of great depth of thought and nobility of deed. The "flaws" you cite are true of any mammalian species.

    All of mankind's troubles can be easily defined in two phrases:

    1) Some sick humans seek power to rule those around them.

    1) Some sick humans hate themselves, but lack the courage to admit it, so they project their self-loathing onto all of humanity.

  • I came here expecting Mr Bubbles and Little sisters. 

  • Regarding this "documentary": Looks like somebody thought they'd jump on the Tea Party Bandwagon, and took a little too long to give birth to the cash cow.

  • Altruism is a moral code by and for cannibals.

  • "i'm challenging the moral code of altruism. the precept that mans moral duty is to live for others, that man must sacrifice himself to others, which is the present day morality"

    errrr... what planet was this woman living on?

  • @lancsFrogger THIS PLANET. What do you do for a living?

  • @soapbxprod "what planet does she live on?" = figure of speech

    its a way of saying i disagree with her assumption that people are altruistic

  • @lancsFrogger It's not people that are altruistic- it's that the dominant moral philosophy of human society is altruism, based on faith. She argues for a philosophy of rational self-interest, based on reason- essentially a modern interpretation of Adam Smith's philosophy.(Scottish Enlightenment).

  • @soapbxprod its not that people are altruistic, its that society is altruistic?

    dude, u either need help figuring stuff out or expressing it clearly. possibly both

  • Comment removed

  • @lancsFrogger - What I think he's trying to say is that the culture had at that time evolved into a philosophy where "altruism" was considered moral behavior, and "self-interest" was considered immoral behavior. It's what allows Romney to be praised for giving money to a destitute woman, then criticized for benefiting from his generosity, for example.

  • @Hiraghm yeh i know. altruism=good & self-interest=bad. i just don't see many people actually acting this way. they might talk of being altruistic (some anyway), but in reality they act selfishly

    so rand challenges something that people say they do, but don't actually do... which is weird. & for what? to promote selfishness?

    to promote enlightened self-interest, or perhaps long vs short-term self-interest? maybe makes sense

    but just selfishness? how is that intelligent?

  • @lancsFrogger - People have been brainwashed to think that altruism is good and self-interest is bad. Self-interest is NOT selfishness. Is it selfishness to put an oxygen mask on yourself before your child on a troubled airliner?

    How is altruism intelligent? Sacrificing yourself for someone else (or many others)? How are they more worthy than you?

    Heinlein also said, "Generosity is inborn; altruism is a learned perversity", and he was right.

  • @Hiraghm some would give the mask to others, some would keep it for themselves

    & as people, we instinctively respect one of these acts & not the other

    you can argue the in's & out's of it if you want, or try to pretend its about something else by framing it as a "who's the most worthy" choice, but it makes no difference

    one is an act of bravery. one is an act of cowardice

  • @lancsFrogger - uhh... no.. the stewardesses instruct you to place your mask on your face before putting a mask on your child's face... so that you're conscious enough to do the latter.

    "Bravery" doesn't enter into it. Survival does. Do you want to be altruistic, noble, and bury your kid? Or do you want to be craven, self-interested, and keep your kid alive?

  • @lancsFrogger - and "we" don't instinctively respect one... we are conditioned to respect one.

    Again, why is someone else's life more worthy than yours? Who gets to decide?

  • @Hiraghm people don't think "i am more worthy thus save myself" & then act. in dangerous situations most people don't think at all. they 'lose their head', panic & do whatever comes naturally (run away, save themself, etc). ie: act first, justify later

    ultimately, i think it depends who is in control. if u control ur body & mind, u act for the common good (i think this is natural. perhaps mathematical on some deep level).

    but if ur body & mind control u, u try to save urself

  • @lancsFrogger - people also don't think "this is for the common good" and then sacrifice themselves. The soldier who throws himself on a grenade doesn't do so for the common good; he does it to save the lives of individual men he's come to love.

    The greatest evils of history have been perpetrated for "the common good" or "the greater good". First the individual is honored for self-sacrifice, then he's expected to sacrifice... then he's sacrificed by others.

  • @lancsFrogger I ask you again- What do you do for a living?

  • @soapbxprod i'll tell if u tell me why u wanna know

    (& u must be honest, or i won't be tellin)

  • @lancsFrogger Go to my YouTube channel page- soapbxprod.

    My name is Luke Sacher.

    I hide from nothing.

  • "Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others" — Ayn Rand

  • @backlighting There it is, in one precise sentence! Thank you!

  • Great entrepreneurs like Donald Trump get up and leave? I'm for that.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy Your forgetting about the ones like Steve Jobs that build industry’s that change history itself

  • @jconnally0

    The one like Steve Jobs who had iPods made in shitty factories in China with a history of work related deaths because he'd rather make money than actually give good conditions for his workers? Fuck Steve Jobs.

    Most likely "entrepreneurs" would keep doing what they are doing now, buy the government, ship jobs over seas, and maximize their profit margin.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy Bet that you own an iPod. And a car. And you heat your house. Hypocrite. What do you do for a living?

  • @soapbxprod

    What does owning a car and heating my house have to do with greedy business owners who put jobs in other countries due to cheap labor?

  • @AmericanNohbuddy They only do that because the CONGRESS allows them to! THAT means GOP AND DEMS BOTH!

  • @soapbxprod

    Congress is paid by the corporations you protect, which is why they allow it to happen. Get rid of the influence and it won't happen.

    Ever thought of combining your comments? Stop reply to me so much.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy I do not protect corporations. I'm anti-corporate. The Government protects corporations in exchange for money and favors.

  • @soapbxprod Your "economic freedom" is letting corporations do whatever they want. Which makes you pro corporate.

    The government protects corporations because they are paid off in the first place through lobbyists and donors. You make sure they don't get bribed, then you won't have these issues.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy It is called Rule of Law. Your understanding of "economic freedom" is a Hobbesian "State of Nature". That is not what I am advocating. I am advocating enforced laws against fraud, theft, and violence. And I agree with you re the Government protecting corporations. They also protect labor unions. Want more of the same? Bigger Government? You want the Foxes to guard the Hen House?

  • @soapbxprod You want less government but enforced laws? That doesn't make sense.

    Labor unions have no where near the amount of power as corporations. It's idiotic to think they are on the same level.

    I want a government that works that isn't paid off by the corporations you protect.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy Also factually incorrect. AFCSME, UFT, Teamsters, UAW...

  • @soapbxprod

    Are the Teamsters on the same level as Exxon-Mobile, Viacom, or News Corp? Give me a break.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy In fact, they are on a higher level. They have more voters. And it's Exxon Mobil. As for Viacom and NewsCorp- they are parasites in the same way as the Teamsters are.

  • @soapbxprod

    Higher level? Oh that's hilarious. The top donors in the 2010 mid term elections were corporations, not unions. Unions are nothing compared to multi-billion dollar industries. That's just laughable.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy More ad hominem. Higher level of voters, not contributions. present your evidence re contributions to political campaigns. Teamsters are way up on the top. So are AFT, UFT, and AFSCME.

  • @soapbxprod "more ad hominem" where did I insult you? You just insulted me by saying "probably a failure in your profession".

    I don't care what you do. What you do or what I do has nothing to do with this discussion.

    "Teamsters are way up on the top"

    And where is your evidence that Teamsters make as much money as something like Exxon Mobil?

  • @AmericanNohbuddy You called my argument "laughable". I repeat- it's not the amount of money, it's the number of voters. There are many more members of the Teamsters and other AFL-CIO unions than there are corporate executives.

  • @soapbxprod It is laughable. Money talks, voters don't.

    AFL-CIO having the same amount of power like Exxon-Mobil LOL

  • @soapbxprod And when those revenues run short of 87 trillion dollars in projected expenditures, it's because elected representatives are put in office by a voting public that wants everything, but doesn't want to pay for it. And that public is demographically larger in the middle of the economic ladder than anywhere else.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy - Why does it bug you so much that companies make money? Do you have a job? Don't you get paid money for doing that job? Unions exist today for one purpose only... blackmail.

  • @Hiraghm It doesn't bug me that they make money. What bugs me is them using the money to rig government in their favor and to oppress others by funding batshit insane candidates.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy - That's true, some corporations try to buy favor by funding Democrat politicians. Others do it by funding Republican politicians. Most do it by funding *both*. Why? Because politicians left the Constitution in the dirt decades ago. If politicians were limited to the powers granted by the Constitution, there'd be no influence to buy...

    That's not a flaw of capitalism.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy And again- I ask you- what do you do?

  • @AmericanNohbuddy You are obviously a collectivist, and probably a failure in your profession. otherwise you would have replied. You asked me to show you who I was and that you would reciprocate.I told you who I am and what I do. You have not met the conditions of your own bargain.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy - No. One is evil, the other 3 are just companies.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy What are YOU giving? What have YOU created?

  • @AmericanNohbuddy Greedy business owners? You mean the ones that INVENTED everything you OWN and keep you ALIVE? What have YOU invented?

  • @soapbxprod i have to step in here for AmericanNohbuddy: what business today, still invents something? or hell, even build something? most of the time, they speculate with money, that's not even there. and the other time, they sort of invent things, nobody actually needs.

  • @manulito2 Apple, Cypress, Microsoft, IBM. LG, Sony, GE, Boeing, Westinghouse, Ford, and on and on and on. You're using their products right now.

  • @soapbxprod

    Not all business owners are greedy. You need to use capitalization for words for some reason?

  • @AmericanNohbuddy Now you have contradicted yourself. It was you who said that business owners were greedy- insinuating that all business owners were. There is a tremendous difference between a company or individual providing goods and services for a fair price determined by the market and a "greed" driven, protectionist, subsidized, anti-competitive one that obliges its customers to accept their goods or services for a price that they set, or none.

  • @soapbxprod Actually I didn't. You totally ignored the other part of my sentenced. I mentioned the greedy business owners who ship jobs overseas.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy They can only do that because the Laws- written by the Government- permit them to.

  • @soapbxprod

    Because they are paid to write the laws that way. If they weren't paid, they wouldn't do that. Just ask Jack Abramoff.

    "You are factually incorrect". Good job elaborating why.

    Also stop replying to me so much, it's annoying.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy Jack Abramoff just wrote a book to that effect. Too bad... I meet like with like. I do not back off.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy - Chances are, your car is made by a foreign car company. Back in the 70s, people like you bought cheaply made foreign cars instead of American made cars. You bought Japanese products even though Japan was subsidizing companies so they could sell at a loss here. So, Americans then felt no loyalty to American employers. American employers now feel no loyalty to American workers.

    Karma's a bitch.

  • @Hiraghm

    Free market right? Maybe when a GM makes a fuel efficient non death trap car, I'd listen.

    Not my fault the US car companies make shitty cars.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy - Not their fault American workers are overpaid, under-industrious and require too much maintenance.

    GM = Government Motors, where you can buy a $250,000 car for only $40,000 out of pocket.

    Free market applies to purchasers of labor, as well as purchasers of automobiles.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy - oh, and btw, those foreign cars being shipped here in the 70s were fuel efficient. They were also small, had non-standard parts, and were poorly manufactured. Until they broke the back of Detroit.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy Half a billion Chinese have been raised out of abject poverty because of those "shitty jobs". Are you saying that you only care about Americans? That's not very altruistic. The problem lies in the laws written by a Government that has been bought and coerced by special interests. As wages begin to rise in China to the level that they are here, the advantage will be lost. Then it will be a matter of free and fair competition of labor based on productivity.

  • @soapbxprod

    So you're pro China for some reason? I want jobs over here. And yes they are shitty jobs. They are paid horribly and have horrible working conditions.

    China won't be free until they get rid of that government.

    

  • @AmericanNohbuddy I'm pro freedom, pro individual. Economic freedom always precedes political freedom. Human history is the proof.

  • @soapbxprod Some people don't seem to understand that nations grow and pass through various phases of growth. China cannot simply explode into a service industry nation. Like any nation seeking economic success, they have to go through a grimy industrial phase. We did it, Western Europe did it as well as Japan. People who whine about factory jobs in China don't realize people there clamor for those jobs. At their level, those ARE well-paying positions.

  • @Slackdragon Precisely! Another ten years and China's labor markets and wage rates will be at parity with ours. Then it will come down to who actually can make the best product for the best price under free and fair trade laws.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy - idiot. Steve Jobs started in a garage. What would living conditions be for those Chinese if they didn't build iPods? The "work-related deaths" are not due to harsh working environment, but to people trying to cash in on health and life policies.

    Glad to see you only buy products from American companies. You don't? Then why should American companies employ only American labor?

    Actually, Apple DOES give good conditions for THEIR workers.

  • @Hiraghm

    Have you looked into Foxconn?

    Yeah the company putting goddamn nets by the outside of the buildings to catch jumpers is just for show. Or how you can be sentenced to prison for over 10 years when trying to form a union. Fucking pathetic.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy - You mean the evil heartless company that doesn't care about its workers... is making an effort to keep them from killing themselves in a country that puts you in prison for trying to unionize?

    You shouldn't be sentenced to 10 years for trying to form a union; you should executed on the spot as an enemy of Mankind.

    (and my great-grandad founded a union).

  • @Hiraghm

    "you should executed on the spot as an enemy of Mankind."

    Executed for trying to form a union? Yeah you're a troll. Fuck off.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy - pot. kettle. black.

  • @Hiraghm

    I'm not calling for people to be executed.

  • @Hiraghm Voila! In a nutshell! ;)

  • @jconnally0 Yes! And advance the human condition!

  • @jconnally0 - Steve Jobs, Steve Wozniak, Bill Gates, Nolan Bushnell, Jay Miner, Dave Morse, Larry Kaplan, Dale Luck, R.J. Mical, Dave Needle, Carl Sassenrath, Jack Tramiel, Tim Jenison, Trip Hawkins, John Carmack, John Romero, Rand and Robyn Miller, Michael Morhaime, Allen Adham, Frank Pearce...

  • @AmericanNohbuddy Donald Trump is NOT a Creator. He is a PARASITE.

  • @soapbxprod

    He's a "job creator" and he is indeed an entrepreneur.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy You are WRONG. he didn't INVENT anything. He's a CASINO owner. A PARASITE. Not Edison. Westinghouse, Tesla, Jobs, Gates, Carnegie...

  • @soapbxprod

    He's in real estate, not casinos. Go do research please.

    You idiots protect anyone who makes money, that includes the like of Trump.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy "You idiots"? I protect no one. i have only one allegiance- to my self and my rational self-interest. Trump is in Real Estate, not Casinos? Casinos ARE real estate. And they are Trump's cash cow. If individuals took responsibility for their own actions and chose not to patronize his casinos, he would be out of business.

  • @soapbxprod

    Trump made his money in the real estate business. His company isn't casino oriented.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy You are factually incorrect.

  • @AmericanNohbuddy Valid point yes I know people are greedy, that’s billions of years of evolution. But let’s recognize this powerful force that brought us here and see where it will take us. Of course add ethics classes in preschool to insure progress is positive. Capitalism brought us great things but we can’t ignore the lack of ethics in the world, or the fact that it can offers us great poetical as indivduals.

  • @jconnally0 - ethics classes in preschool? Back when we behaved ethically, we didn't HAVE preschool (but the Soviet Union did...)

    Leave the teaching of ethics to the parents, and leave the kids at home as long as possible so they can learn ethics.

    How're you going to learn ethics from public (usually unionized) schoolteachers??

  • @soapbxprod - an entrepreneur is not necessarily an inventor. Bushnell "stole" his idea for Pong. Jobs "stole" the desktop GUI metaphor from Xerox.

    Gates' father had 10 million when he dropped out of college. He didn't "invent" anything; he *bought* a version of CP/M to sell to IBM as MS-DOS.

  • @soapbxprod - no, union officers are parasites. Donald Trump is a job creator.

  • @Hiraghm Yes, agree re union officers. And yes- Trump creates jobs- but they're mostly empty calorie jobs. Casinos and overpriced buildings. Same thing with Rupert Murdoch- he's a complete parasite. No product of any real surplus value as with the products of Silicon Valley. Just a lot of junk?

  • January 17: Fairfax, VA and Annapolis, MD

    January 26: New York City

  • yeah, let the markets run free! they always do, what's best for us. it worked very fine in 2008. and yes, i'm a socialist-anarchist, so bomb me with angry comments :D

  • @manulito2 That's a contradiction. You cannot be a socialist and an anarchist.

  • @soapbxprod yes, i can. just look up the philosophies of bakunin and most. it's also called collective anarchism.

  • @manulito2 And you can look up Benjamin Tucker and his philosophy of American individualist anarchism.

  • @manulito2 as in Josiah Warren? It failed.

  • Both this and Atlas Shrugged "Part 1" (snicker) have BOMBED at the box office. The market has spoken, Randroids.

  • @TheoIsTheGreatest I don't care motherfucker. I'm going to watch it for my own. Even if I'm the only one.

  • @TheoIsTheGreatest And the top box office winners are usually those that pander to the lowest common denominator. It's been that way since "Tarzan The Ape Man".

  • @soapbxprod You're a Randroid; you ARE the lowest common denominator. The fact that you need a miserable old dead hag to reassure you that you're NOT should tell you something.

  • Comment removed

  • @TheoIsTheGreatest - Yes, I'd much rather have the criminal organization known as the state tell me everything is pink unicorns and candy canes. Okay, now go back to sleep.

  • @magentawave Paultard. Color me shocked.

  • @magentawave Have you seen TheoTard's plain & unimaginative channel? He seems like a massive homosexual who enjoys being anally abused by the state. He's a sheep with a boyfriend who is a shepherd.

  • @TheoIsTheGreatest It's amazing. How were you able to post this comment without it getting automatically marked as spam? I've seen it zillions of times, almost word for word.