Why is everyone here?
Just wondering about the makeup of Gulch members.
Are you here to write/read about:
1. The "Atlas Shrugged" movies to date
2. The book "Atlas Shrugged"
3. Ayn Rand's books in general
4. Objectivism
5. Shrugging
6. Having shrugged / ideas that might be topics in Atlantis
7. Alternatives to shrugging
8. Politics or philosophy in general
9. Other
Are you here to write/read about:
1. The "Atlas Shrugged" movies to date
2. The book "Atlas Shrugged"
3. Ayn Rand's books in general
4. Objectivism
5. Shrugging
6. Having shrugged / ideas that might be topics in Atlantis
7. Alternatives to shrugging
8. Politics or philosophy in general
9. Other
I like this site because we don't always have to be so serious. If we are to attract people to the movies, books, and philosophy, it helps to provide a fun atmosphere and avoid doctrinaire dry criticism of those showing curiosity, yet not fully comfortable with some of the precepts. We must fight the false perception that Rand followers are all stoic, heartless and "greedy".
O.A.
Can I vote for 8 twice?
I'm in the process of reading the book well into my thirties and found that I've been spouting many of these ideals at people since I was a kid. It's a painful book to read when you can see the moocher's arguments laid in the news day in and day out.
I bought a Rearden Steel cup and Galt's Gulch flag pin and saw the option to join so here I am. I figured this is the closest I'll get to being a part of the movies so if $4 a month will help out, I'm willing to chip in a bit.
As a person who had to give up politics for health reasons [I discovered I LIKED telling people what to do!?], I would be interested in how a person self-labeled "left of center" liked AS, in particular.
I believe people should set up some means of support and help for the poor. Private organizations can do it, but gov't has a unique role since it can use force and guns to keep people from getting a free ride-- getting to live in a more peaceful and just world but not profiting from it. We should not try to hide the fact that taxes mean people with guns will take your stuff if you don't hand it over, and as such we should be cautious about excessive taxation and spending.
It seems too common that upper-middle-class people feel they need a handout. I'm not sure what OWS is talking about WRT to 99%, but my understanding is they're saying 99% of the population either deserves a handout or at least shouldn't have to pay for the handouts. That's crazy. The people with top 1% networth do not have enough wealth to solve all the problems of the world. Maybe it never could be enough b/c the real problem is people failing to take initiative. I love how the AS protagonists go out and DO something and don't spend any thought on what OTHER people think of it.
OK, "people should set up means of support and help for the poor."
My first philosophy teacher [Rand} said, define your terms so that we both know what we are talking about. "People" are who? It's a collective noun, so I'm assuming a group. How are they chosen? What are their qualifications? Do they do the work of setting up the group along with whatever they do to make a living? Are they paid? By whom?
"support and help" has a zillion meanings. Let's let that one float for a while.
"the poor" are who? Who decides when someone is actually poor, or just wants more than they can pay for right now? As an aside, I also refer to myself as a member of the working rich. Does it matter why they are poor? How much support and help do they get? For how long? Who decides?
philosophical question: on what grounds?
I've discovered that the word "but" is a useful waypoint. In general, it negates whatever has come before it.
gov't does indeed have a unique role "because it can use force". I promise that this one will bite you later.
then I get lost - "getting to live in a more peaceful and just world but not profiting from it" who is it that gets to live in this world? I think your brain was faster than your fingers and a clause is missing. or it's faster than my brain. detail, please.
peaceful, I understand. Just? I don't know what you mean by that one.
I'm going to leave the last sentence for a bit later. Gotta go eat. Thanks!
Regarding the stuff about getting to live an more peaceful and just world, I'm saying that if someone reduces poverty, everyone benefits from living in a society without poverty. It similar to how everyone benefits from policing, whether or not they want to pay for it. My understand of the counter-argument (correct me if this is a straw man), is "I don't get any benefit from other people not being poor. If there are children down the road who can't afford basic food, medicine, and housing, I can just keep my family away from them and optionally choose to help those who I do have contact with. My freely-given gifts will be more effective because I'll make sure they're well-spent better than a gov't program." That sounds similar to people saying they don't want to pay for policing because they can protect themselves with their own locks and weapons. Other people do feel the need for policing, and they think everyone benefits from it. They'll use those police to make everyone pay.
Here I was thinking that we'd established that politics was a branch of philosophy...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Br...