Ayn Rand

[Gin and Tonic Sky]

But show me ONE person, who, when faced with death - doesn't come to some internal personal decision to actually accept help with being fed, and given aid from whomever - just to stay alive.....

Ayn Rand should've practiced what she preached, and invested wisely or relied on charity/churches. Ron Paul doesn't accept Medicare or Medicaid.

Rand did address this issue in writing , long before she became ill or old.

"It is obvious, in such cases, that a man receives his own money which was taken from him by force, directly and specifically, without his consent, against his own choice. Those who advocated such laws are morally guilty, since they assumed the “right” to force employers and unwilling co-workers. But the victims, who opposed such laws, have a clear right to any refund of their own money—and they would not advance the cause of freedom if they left their money, unclaimed, for the benefit of the welfare-state administration"

The point being is that if the money is unjustly taken as theft , it is just for the victim to have back what is his. If I break into your house and steal your wife, tv and beer its not unjust for you want your wife, TV and beer back.

Granted Id rather have my libertarian heroes be more like ron Paul and Rose Wilder lane, but her point stands

[Gin and Tonic Sky]

Rand's philosophy equates collectivism with enslavement. To partake in such programs is like a PETA vegan eating a hamburger. Like so many false idols of the conservative movment, she clearly did not believe her own bullshit.

Suppose our PETA member were forced against his or her will to pay a burger subsidy tax that was paid to White Castle and McDonalds so that they could carry out a government contact to provide free food to the community and that food tax completely took up that PETA members food budget to an extend that he/she couldn't plant a soy bean patch or buy tofu, you would be at least a little sympathetic to our vegan if he/or she reluctantly accpeted a quarter pounder. As a matter of fact you would be railing agains the injustice of first stealing that persons money through the burger tax , and then leaving them litte altrnative to partaking in something they consider undignified.

This is precisely what you advocate - tax ordinary folks (and I have in mind ordinary people perhaps not people like Rand) at a high rate making it difficult to for them to save and provide for their own future, and then call them hypocrites if they have the oppose the system when they can do nothing else. Some sort emphathy you advocate there!

Thats why its called slavery , you can oppose it but you can't leave it.

[The_Noble_Cause]

But show me ONE person, who, when faced with death - doesn't come to some internal personal decision to actually accept help with being fed, and given aid from whomever - just to stay alive.....

Ayn Rand should've practiced what she preached, and invested wisely or relied on charity/churches. Ron Paul doesn't accept Medicare or Medicaid.

Rand did address this issue in writing , long before she became ill or old.

"It is obvious, in such cases, that a man receives his own money which was taken from him by force, directly and specifically, without his consent, against his own choice. Those who advocated such laws are morally guilty, since they assumed the “right” to force employers and unwilling co-workers. But the victims, who opposed such laws, have a clear right to any refund of their own money—and they would not advance the cause of freedom if they left their money, unclaimed, for the benefit of the welfare-state administration"

The point being is that if the money is unjustly taken as theft , it is just for the victim to have back what is his. If I break into your house and steal your wife, tv and beer its not unjust for you want your wife, TV and beer back.

Granted Id rather have my libertarian heroes be more like ron Paul and Rose Wilder lane, but her point stands

Not really, as the gov't had already spent her money and left t-bills in its place. By going on soc. security she is effectively stealing money out of other peoples' pockets. Even if she didn't pay into the system all her life, she'd probably go on the dole anyway. It's just what hypocrites do.

[Gin and Tonic Sky]

Not really, as the gov't had already spent her money and left t-bills in its place.

so if I take your argument to its natural conclusions

1) if a thief robs a bank, the thief wouldn't have to pay it back because he claims he already spent it?

2) Some day when the system is broke (pretty soon btw) , then it will be ok and just to to say to all potential SS receipients, sorry we spent your exact dollars in 1993. Go to hell. Nobody gets anything now ( which by the way is what happens in the end with all socialist programs)

By going on soc. security she is effectively stealing money out of other peoples' pockets.

but as because you point out ,SS is a german inspired socialist system- you are foreced to opt in - and as part of the scheme you play by its rules. The rules of the game, whether the game is a just one or not, are , people who pay into it are entitled funds. By the rules set up SS isnt means tested.

Even if she didn't pay into the system all her life, she'd probably go on the dole anyway.

an irrelevant hypothetical she didnt do that

It's just what hypocrites do.

by not taking her funds back, she would be effectively helping the system fund itself. Wouldn't that - effectively donating to a system you dont support- hypocracy as well? [

[The_Noble_Cause]

Not really, as the gov't had already spent her money and left t-bills in its place.

so if I take your argument to its natural conclusions

1) if a thief robs a bank, the thief wouldn't have to pay it back because he claims he already spent it?

2) Some day when the system is broke (pretty soon btw) , then it will be ok and just to to say to all potential SS receipients, sorry we spent your exact dollars in 1993. Go to hell. Nobody gets anything now ( which by the way is what happens in the end with all socialist programs)

By going on soc. security she is effectively stealing money out of other peoples' pockets.

but as because you point out ,SS is a german inspired socialist system- you are foreced to opt in - and as part of the scheme you play by its rules. The rules of the game, whether the game is a just one or not, are , people who pay into it are entitled funds. By the rules set up SS isnt means tested.

Even if she didn't pay into the system all her life, she'd probably go on the dole anyway.

an irrelevant hypothetical she didnt do that

It's just what hypocrites do.

by not taking her funds back, she would be effectively helping the system fund itself. Wouldn't that - effectively donating to a system you dont support- hypocracy as well? [

Desperate...desperate...desperate. Look, I’m not rehashing this. If collectivism and socialism truly leads a nation down the path to serfdom and is nothing short of pure evil, as Ayn and her followers would have us believe, than you do not partake in it. End of story.

[S2M]

^^^^I wouldn't rehash it either if I just got highsticked in the dome by Matt's johnson.....

[The_Noble_Cause]

^^^^I wouldn't rehash it either if I just got highsticked in the dome by Matt's johnson.....

Umm, not hardly. Neither of you have been able to explain why the leading proponent of individualism and laissez-faire capitalism was on the dole. You're both coming off like sad groupies, trying in vain to defend the indefensible. Matt's argument is no different than the lame one you put forward back on page one. Your position amounts to this: "Ayn Rand is my hero. How dare you point out that she is a hypocrite. I can't hear you. Nah Nah, Nah Nah." It's just blind cult worship and it's a collosal waste of time. For all of Ayn's invective against the system, she was more than happy to become a cog on the wheel of the government machine. Them's the facts.

[S2M]

I believe we have answered that question. Rand was against taxation. She reasoned it as she was just getting her money back. Period. End of story.

[The_Noble_Cause]

I believe we have answered that question. Rand was against taxation. She reasoned it as she was just getting her money back. Period. End of story.

If the system was so evil, why partake in it at all? Sorry. Not buying it. Moving along now...

[S2M]

I believe we have answered that question. Rand was against taxation. She reasoned it as she was just getting her money back. Period. End of story.

If the system was so evil, why partake in it at all? Sorry. Not buying it. Moving along now...

I'm going to have to assume you are a proponent of INCOME tax.....

[The_Noble_Cause]

I'm going to have to assume you are a proponent of INCOME tax.....

I'm actually a fair tax guy, but that's mostly becuz I find filing my taxes a pain in the ass. I don't think income taxes are unconstitutional, if that's what you're asking. We can't fund this country on tariffs alone.

[Gin and Tonic Sky]

^^^^I wouldn't rehash it either if I just got highsticked in the dome by Matt's johnson.....

Umm, not hardly. Neither of you have been able to explain why the leading proponent of individualism and laissez-faire capitalism was on the dole. You're both coming off like sad groupies, trying in vain to defend the indefensible. Matt's argument is no different than the lame one you put forward back on page one. Your position amounts to this: "Ayn Rand is my hero. How dare you point out that she is a hypocrite. I can't hear you. Nah Nah, Nah Nah." It's just blind cult worship and it's a collosal waste of time. For all of Ayn's invective against the system, she was more than happy to become a cog on the wheel of the government machine. Them's the facts.

I agree this back and forth on this is going to bore my short attention span. But FYI I dont idolise Ayn Rand . Agree with her on many things, but disagree with her and other objectivists on a fair few of philosophical points , and have not appreciated at all a few things she said - for example - how Rand derided Libertarians as "hippies of the right." But I think my point stands I just don't think she or anybody, if they've been forced to pay high taxes for specific govt services to the point of not being able to afford private services should be considered a hypocrite for having to rely on the system which broke them in the first place.

[S2M]

^^^^I wouldn't rehash it either if I just got highsticked in the dome by Matt's johnson.....

Umm, not hardly. Neither of you have been able to explain why the leading proponent of individualism and laissez-faire capitalism was on the dole. You're both coming off like sad groupies, trying in vain to defend the indefensible. Matt's argument is no different than the lame one you put forward back on page one. Your position amounts to this: "Ayn Rand is my hero. How dare you point out that she is a hypocrite. I can't hear you. Nah Nah, Nah Nah." It's just blind cult worship and it's a collosal waste of time. For all of Ayn's invective against the system, she was more than happy to become a cog on the wheel of the government machine. Them's the facts.

You go back and forth in the political thread all the time. Which leads me to believe you either just don't care enough about this subject to begin with - in which case I question why you even bothered....or you realize you have been defeated, and are backpedaling.