Galtspresso: an idea whose time has come

Posted by Eudaimonia 9 years, 10 months ago to Business
63 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

So, on Saturday, I posted about a chain of coffee franchises that I had found.

From their literature, it was apparent that there was some agreement in philosophy.
For that, they will get my business.

But, I would certainly prefer to give my business to an unabashed, in your face Objectivist chain of coffee franchises.

Galtspresso.

So, today's thought exercise:
what good or service would you most like to see with an unabashed Objectivist branding - and what would you call it?


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ puzzlelady 9 years, 10 months ago
    Oh, I love the idea of a chain of Objectivist coffee houses. Here are some names: The Fountainhead. Dollar Sign Salon. Shruggers' Shack. The Rand Stand. You build them, and I'll contribute some intelligent games for the tables. - I like Galtspresso, too.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 9 years, 10 months ago
    Interesting history regarding coffee houses in western culture.http://www.amazon.com/A-History-World-6-Glasses/dp/0802715524
    The rise in popularity of coffee houses in Amsterdam lead to the first modern stock markets. Places to do business and also for the intellectuals to discuss philosophy and politics. seems like a nice fit :) There is also an historical novel, "The Coffee Trader"
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ KSilver3 9 years, 9 months ago
    Cool topic. I haven't fleshed this all the way out in my head yet, but I'm thinking an accounting firm would be necessary to help business owners reconcile their objectivist ideals with the necessity of doing business with sheeple who don't get it. Until we could find an actual Gulch, we have to do business with ignorance. Giving someone like Ben and Jerry's my money feels like a Pope being required to perform abortions during mass.
    I would love to find a way to run a business while adhering to my principles of not supporting Looters. Don't think its possible, but I've seen very creating accountants.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by $ fivedollargold 9 years, 10 months ago
    Concur with CG on this post. Who he voted for is his business.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by LetsShrug 9 years, 10 months ago
      His "business" is rubbed in our faces at every turn...he's made it our business...and he's anti gulch in practice, fivedollar. One might wonder why he's here, and he is an active force working against liberty....so that makes it our business, iffin' you care about freedom and the Constitution.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 9 years, 10 months ago
      At the hazard of upsetting some, I am going to be hiding this portion of this thread as it is off-topic.

      If anyone would like continue this discussion, you are free to create a new post.

      Apologies, and thank you.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • -2
    Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 10 months ago
    The objectivist brand needs work. Politicians have tried to co-opt it to mean the opposite of what it is (what I read in AS and Fountainhead, anyway). Other people use it as a sanctimonious fig leaf to throw over their acting like asses.

    For this reason, I see objectivism as have a cost rather than a value of it were associated with an enterprise.

    If there were a word that people hear and think "valuing people's fundamental right to themselves and what they make," "doing what you think is right and not operating as a cog in a group," "not treating others with pity or contempt," "not grudgingly doing something b/c other people say that's what moral," "not trying to guilt-trip or cajole people into something they don't really want," it would be hugely popular.

    That being said, I want an objectivist healthcare provider with people who love medicine and want to build a track record of excellence to get rich, with no tacit suggestion that b/c it's a care-related field it's a charity.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by LetsShrug 9 years, 10 months ago
      You want "an objectivist healthcare provider with people who love medicine and want to build a track record of excellence to get rich, with no tacit suggestion that b/c it's a care-related field it's a charity." Really, you want that? I thought you wanted bo to be president..TWICE. Which is it??? Do you even hear yourself? Double speaker.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ puzzlelady 9 years, 10 months ago
        Come on, give the guy a chance to work his way through to better premises, greater enlightenment. Don't condemn him forever for earlier mistakes. Set a better example, reason well, point to rational premises. Learning takes time and patience. There's a fine line between tough love and ad hominem put-downs.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by khalling 9 years, 10 months ago
          I just see a perfectly interesting post derailed. frustrating
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 10 months ago
            I agree. I'll post no further messages or responses to this thread unless they're about objectivist-branded businesses.

            I sort-of started the tangent when I said the brand-image needs work. Many people would think the coffee shop is a place for fascists, e.g. the Wikipeda article I corrected last week. http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/24...

            People who've read the books, though, know better, so no more talk about it from me on this thread.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ winterwind 9 years, 9 months ago
              You didn't "sort of" start the tangent, you started the tangent.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 9 months ago
                How about an objectivist hotel and conference center? An organization (perhaps coordinated by jbrenner) could buy a resort in a country willing to provide some tax abatement deal. Part of it could be developed into a business incubator, with the initial costs funded by the hotel/convention center.. If it works, it turns into a place where angel investors look for opportunities and a cool place where people want to start a business. If that ever works, it would be a micro-Gulch, and it would have to start fighting to keep that favorable tax deal.

                If the incubator dream doesn't work out, an objectivist hotel/convention center is a great thing on its own.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by LetsShrug 9 years, 10 months ago
          CG's been in here for over a year and hasn't changed his tune one note... were' not picking on some newbie who is interested in learning, give us more credit than that. He voted for bo twice, fund raised for him and is a big hillary supporter.... ?!
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Flootus5 9 years, 10 months ago
        This appears to be a classic "check your premises" moment.

        Premise 1: CG has voted for Obummer twice. If true, that is in direct contradiction (especially Vote #2) to:

        Premise 2: CG: "I want an objectivist healthcare provider with people who love medicine and want to build a track record of excellence to get rich, with no tacit suggestion that b/c it's a care-related field it's a charity."

        One of these premises is wrong. CG?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 10 months ago
          CG is not confused. He knows exactly what his beliefs are, and he is neither a fan of Rand or an Objectivist. Notice how confusing his posts are. He's not that stupid.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 10 months ago
          The facts are both correct. I do not support all of President Obama's policy decisions.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Flootus5 9 years, 10 months ago
            Soooo, Am I correct in concluding you did not support Obamacare? Would you then disagree that most of Obama's policies are of the same socialistic, redistributionist flavor as was pulled off in the "Affordable" Care Act?
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 10 months ago
              ACA is a mixed bag. I lobbied successfully to have HSAs not outlawed by the program. I lobbied unsuccessfully to have some sort of "term" insurance option with underwriting, as way around manditory no-underwriting insurance. I criticized the public option, but I don't recall whether I actually talked to any staffers or policy-makers.

              Here's something I wrote about it five years ago when it was a work in progress: http://madprudence.blogspot.com/2009/12/...

              Probably my most controversial (from an objectivist standpoint) idea is that gov't should help the poor. I agreed with that part of PPACA. (We can have another post on why that's not alms.) My biggest disagreement with it is it was sold as a way for the gov't to manage middle class medical purchases. Gov't offering to managing citizens' lives is a horrible thing, almost as bad as hurting people directly.

              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ KSilver3 9 years, 9 months ago
                Here's a premise check for you CG. You say it is controversial for you to believe govt should help the poor. I think it is controversial, but for a completely different reason that you probably think. Check this premise- "does government ever really help the poor?" Premise2- What does it mean to help the poor?
                If by helping the poor, you mean giving them handouts which the government takes from other people, I would check that premise. I don't see any way that that can be considered helping. All you are doing separating our society into distinct classes, creating dependency and sparking divisiveness between classes.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by richrobinson 9 years, 10 months ago
      I have been thinking about this comment for a while CG. Objectivism is fine the way it is. If a politician or anyone else tries to co-opt it then they will suffer because what ever they do will not stand up to reason. We built the finest health care system in the world when the free market was our guide. ObamaCare is the final socialist nail in the health care coffin.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo