I'm an Objectivist. Debate me.

I don't particularly care what subjective considerations you make, frankly.

Moreover, I also don't particularly care for your patronizing, snide remarks regarding your expectations of me.

If "violent interference" is not a concern to you, then why do you reference it with regard to centralized government and compelled adherence with the social contract?

Yawn.

And you continue to ignore the tragic outcomes of a bastard ideology, like Objectivism. It's a fallacy, a fiction created for a story and you will never be John Galt. Boohoo.

Moreover, one must consider the moral implications of the system in which they find themselves. I find the central government of the US to be far more benevolent than the random happenstance of malevolent little tyrant Warlords like those in Somalia - your acceptance of Randian idiocy doesn't seemingly care very much. I wonder if that is overt?

Yawn.

I demanded quite a few answers from the OP who has continuously proven themselves to be immature in this discussion and unable to answer very basic questions regarding the imperative of truths here.

This ideology - Objectivism - this social compass, if you will, is itself a self defeating tautology that leads directly to tyranny.

Slaves shall serve.

 

No one is advocating for people to not work. There is a big distinction to be made here between must and ought, I think, which is basic. How is it fair that restaurants throw away perfectly edible food at the end of the day instead of donating it to those without, for example?

Stores are filled mostly with garbage, non-food items of relatively miniscule nutritional value. Thanks, capitalism, for the frankenfood you sell at such low cost; artificially bloating the cost of healthcare in a double whammy so investors can laugh their way to the bank.

Venezuela was not socialist. Moreover, the means of production in this country are owned not by the workers that -sell- this means of production, but by those that employ them; hence the boss/worker master/slave dichotomy.

The government has not taken over so much of the economy that people cannot freely trade with one another. That is not the definition of socialism. It is the definition of authoritarian tyranny.

I don't think Ayn Rand can be taken seriously, so quoting here is absurd. She was a bad novelist that wrote fiction stories that supported her nihilistic, self destructive social view, and that's all.

 

No, I’m saying employers should pay their workers enough to live on. Venezuela is a dictatorship. Norway is a socialist country with plenty of full shelves and also people who can’t work get provided for by a welfare system.

BTW, outside of the oil industry, Venezuela has almost no state owned businesses. Canada has more state owned businesses than Venezuela does.

 

This thread is toxic now.

 

@Aphotic I’m not talking to you anymore.

 

Then block me. Frankly, I don't care. You opened a thread on a discussion forum and expect specific people to stop replying to it?

You have not offered real answers to serious challenges posed in this thread.

You don't get to just run away from those arguments because they're inconvenient.

 

Venezuela is -not- socialist. What Venezuela did is price fix, and thus destroy the market instead of control it with meaningful measures like Nordic Democratic Socialism does.

That's the failure of the folks that spew these nonsensical talking points. They go on and on - everything that isn't Marlboro Man Wild West American Capitalism is COMMIE RED SOCIALISM.

It's absurd and it is just like someone calling you an anti-semite - they don't want to have a debate, thus they slander you with insults to avoid the argument.

 

If you can find it, check out the movie made about her life. Mirren plays Ayn and Peter Fonda is her poor husband.

 

Would laissez-faire economist Friedrich von Hayek advocate Society Security and Medicare as government protection against illness and old age poverty?

 

I don't really care for Friedrich von Hayek. I like Ludwig Von Mises better.

 

Von Mises is worst. After people figure out that Rand, and Hayek are full of crap the "Libertarians" (a name to appeal to people that are ignorant of politics) then crawl to Mises who was Hayek's mentor. But it seems that you don't know anymore about Mises than Hayek because you avoided the question of Hayek's position on SSI and Medicare. It is hard to hide ignorance.

 

I am a Universalist........
I don't know enough about Objectivism to even begin a debate yet......
but because my own concept of Eventual Universal Salvation....... as it seems to apply both in terms of the Afterlife......... as well as also economics, politics, health care, education and job creation....... seems to have quite a bit of overlap with Objectivism as you have described it so far.........
I will try to make an effort to research this as soon as I can.

This will give you some idea of what I mean by Universalism.....

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...f-modern-world-problems-even-possible.432571/

Is a Unified Theory of Modern World Problems even possible?

 

I brought up Mises. You're the one that brough up Hayak. I don't argue for people that I don't support.

 

It is the same philosophy. Hayek was sent to the London of Economics by Mises to represent his economics theories. If you don't support Hayek, you don't support Mises if you want to be consistent and have some credibility. Do you know what "principal" means? The two share the same principals! Wow. It is very sadz (sic) when Randian Libertarians do not know anything about the ideologies they advocate and attack those they never even read--like Marx. Memorizing right-wing fascist talking points only gets you so far. You have to actually know the subject matter and not be just a parrot.

 

Okay, I will look into Universalism. I am curious. Thank you for your post.

Uhh.. I don't know. Most likely not based on the history and current state of the world.

 

I'm a fascist for advocating free voluntary exchange? Nice conclusion.

 

Repeating Rand and Hayek talking points makes one a fascist. And when I ask a question about their views of SSI and Medicare suddenly no one knows anything. One reason is the majority of Americans support those programs and exposing Hayek's view will make Libertarianism, Randian fascism even more unpopular.
Austrian Economics defeated. And the funny thing is I didn't hear one-tenth of the arguments I expected.

 

Calling me or Rand a fascist is like calling Hitler or Mussolini a libertarian. If I'm a fascist, that makes you commie scum.

Ayn Rand and Mises would not support Medicare or SSI. I think I've read somewhere that Hayek has supported social programs like these, which is the reason why I don't like him.

 

No, no, no. I am socialist scum! You still can't get it right!!!

Hayek did not support SSI and Medicare--that is why he collected SSI benefits for himself at Charles Koch's (living today) recommendation. Austrian Economist Friedrich von Hayek came to the US to collect Social Security and Medicare. Charles Koch encouraged Hayek to collect SSI while in and out of the US. Koch further advised that when in the US Hayek could also have medical care for a gall bladder medical illness. It turns out it wasn’t the patriarch of the Fred C. Koch that gave the advice, but one of his living sons, Charles Koch, that is now bankrolling mafia connected Trump to abolish SSI leaving millions of Americans in poverty who paid into the old age insurance program.

Charles Koch to Friedrich Hayek: Use Social Security!
In a 1973 letter, the right-wing billionaire urged the libertarian philosopher to collect Social Security and to use Medicare coverage when visiting the United States.
By Yasha Levine and Mark Ames
SEPTEMBER 27, 2011

 

"There is no difference between communism and socialism, except as a means of achieving the same ultimate end: communism proposes to enslave men by force, socialism - by vote. It is merely the different between murder and suicide." - Ayn Rand

 

I am attempting to relate the economic application of Universalism........to a specific situation faced by residents of a part of Nova Scotia, Canada that is less than a hundred miles from my home.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ser-or-m-p-bill-casey.539570/#post-1069489904

 

Spot on!

 

And yet Empress and Appleo have argued for days that socialism and communism are different citing "ownership of means of production" as a criterion. And as an "individual" I thought Libertarianism would support my American free choice to vote--obviously not. Capitalism revels in torture (Chicago's secret Holman square prison), murder (Officer Field retired after serving 20 plus years in the Central City, Kentucky Police Department as a high official) and suicide-(Drug companies knew opioids killed about 200,000 people) just look at the statistics in the US--as it attempts to monetize human suffering.

 

Where did I argue that?

 

I took a major step toward Universalism when I read about Dr. Moses Coady who began The Antigonish Movement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antigonish_Movement

The spiritual application of Universalism sounds like this:

https://www.near-death.com/experiences/notable/christian-andreason.html#a04h

Applying Universalism to Economics, job creation, universal health care, job creation/ full employment needs to be founded on the idea that human life......(and even the lives of animals for that matter).... may have something like Infinite Value to a Being / Beings / beings who have in a sense Evolved...... over infinite time in the past..... who may even be able to control Big Bang type events....???

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...begin-in-matter-or-fundamental-energy.465052/

Where did Intelligence begin, in matter or fundamental energy?

........

The possibility of an Intelligence / Intelligences / intelligences.... that exist in fundamental or nearly fundamental energy...... allow for the possibility of a greatly increased valuation on the intrinsic value of human life......(and all life for that matter)......

Could God the Father be the most emotional being in the universe/ multiverse?

Former Atheist and near death experiencer Mellen Thomas Benedict did a great job of laying the foundation for this idea......

https://www.near-death.com/reincarnation/experiences/mellen-thomas-benedict.html#a05

Once we have a firm logical foundation for a surge in the valuation placed on life...... and of course the assets that can sustain life..... we are all set up for a surge in the valuation placed on certain types of real estate.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-fed-policy-pay-off-usa-national-debt.489825/

Could a real estate boom plus better Fed policy pay off USA national debt?

So far.... I may be one of the only people elaborating on the possible economic connection between Universalism as applied to spirituality..... with its application in job creation and every part of the economy.

Dr. Moses Coady was Roman Catholic...... felt that there was hope for the "unsaved dead"..... and also felt that there was hope for the people in economic purgatory / hell...........! I believe in Universal Salvation in spirituality as explained by Christian Andreason..... so I felt that the idea must also have an application in economics.

Universal Salvation, is everybody eventually led back to heaven/paradise/love?


Christian Andreason, Chapter 3: