Question for objectivists and Ayn Rand fans

Galbraith was the poster child of the looters.




Quote from Thunderdog:

All very good points (especially the parts where you agree with me :D ). But true laissez-faire capitalism, as implied by Rand, would inevitably result in monopolism and other anti-competitive practices that would come at the expense of the consumer and other well-intentioned enterprises. (Look at the examples offered by history.) Also, we have seen how a lack of regulation can truly muck things up, where de facto fraud can often pass for incompetence. That's not to say I favor a "central planning committee." However, surely there is a middle ground. I wish that John Kenneth Galbraith were alive so that he could chime in.
More...
 
<i>Adultery is breaking your word, and intentionally initiating emotional distress against 1 or more innocent people. Definitely not compatible with objectivism.</i>

--->Most sexually attractive people commit themselves to the unnatural state of monogamy, and then lie to their partner as soon as the inevitable occurs. Rand was way too honest for any of that.

Haven't you ever had a 'side-action optional' type of relationship? I'd never have it any other way. For someone who'd never lie to the one they love, it's really the only way to fly.

<i>Smoking is basically destroying your health, looks, and hygiene, as well as harming others via passive smoking. Definitely not compatible with objectivism.</i>

--->I'd expect more from you, Cutten. Self-serving Objectivism and self-serving hedonism aren't incompatible.

<i>Homosexuality has existed since as long as humans have, so it cannot be called abnormal. And being abnormal is not wrong, if you are not harming others. In any case, she did not call it abnormal, her words were much more harsh.</i>

--->So she wrote a few homophobic words in the 1950's, back when the medical journals all unanimously called same sex relationships a "mental disease"... so shoot her for not being a few more decades ahead of her time.
 
Quote from nokomisjeff:

Galbraith was the poster child of the looters.
More...
Only if their interpretation was self-serving. Much like those who blame Keynsian eonomics for overspending but who do not pay down debt during expansionary periods, or tax appropriately. You can choose to look at only one side of the coin, or bastardize and pervert a theory until it says whatever you want it to say; once you unencumber yourself of intellectual honesty anything is possible.
 
i am not an objectivist, however i do agree with many of their premises.

all one needs to do is look at those with/in power and what they believe to judge the utiltarian worth of a philosophy.

i venture to say more than a few would be of the objectivist bent.

surf
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

i am not an objectivist, however i do agree with many of their premises.

all one needs to do is look at those with/in power and what they believe to judge the utiltarian worth of a philosophy.

i venture to say more than a few would be of the objectivist bent.

surf
More...
Not Buffett. Not Gates. Not Soros. Probably guys like Trump, though. Who sets a better example?
 
nice quote but too bad cigarettes kill you...there's something COLD about her

"I like cigarettes, Miss Taggart. I like to think of fire held in a man's hand. Fire, a dangerous force, tamed at his fingertips. I often wonder about the hours when a man sits alone, watching the smoke of a cigarette, thinking. I wonder what great things have come alive from such hours. When a man thinks, there is a spot of fire alive in his mind---and it is proper that he should have the burning point of a cigarette as his one expression."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top