Ok, I'm game, but I'm sure I'm not the only one rusty on their Rand- I read her like 15 years ago.... So what would a more rational objectivist society look like? How would it handle 2 of the situations mentioned above; the decision whether to undertake a potentially bankrupting, preemptive war and how would the safety net lines be drawn- ie what happens to those who fail at work for one reason or another?
So you want to apply the "principles" of libertarianism and objectivism in a "rational way", right? Well, since the principles themselves are quite fanciful and irrational, what difference would it make how you apply them, rationally or irrationally? Or did you mean you'd rationally select the principles that seem more rational and would thus be easier/make more sense to apply? Also, I have no idea where the "saving western heritage" comes from. At what point in "our" heritage did we ever embrace objectivism? Or maybe you'd like to "save" (or return to) the wonderful Gilded Age?
See Surf, Alfonso points out the problem with your wonderful idea. You have little rich kid bleeding hearts like him, who think it's entirely fair for the government to take well over 50% of my earned capital, "since I benefit from it". (Notes from a previous thread). He also claims that the principles themselves are "quite fanciful and irrational", but fails to explain why. Notice he doesn't list any of the principles, he simply uses a broad stroke and rejects all of it. Alfonso and his like are the main philosophical enemy in any kind of "movement" like this which needs to occur. Punishing the achievers and rewarding the slackers is perfectly valid in his mind (conclusions from a previous thread). Notice how he used my quotation that a democracy is a dictatorship of the majority AS IF IT WAS A SWIPE towards me It's because he has very socialistic ideals and is our polar opposite. The big problem is, that socialism is an easy sell to the SLACKERS who make up the majority. It basically tells the SLACKERS that HEY.... you don't have to work very hard, you don't have to work as hard as that driven ass kicker over there, and guess what? We the GOVT. will make sure you both get rewarded the same. Hows that sound??? This is why we are doomed with all this bullshit spending. Everybody wants something for nothing. Everyone greedily grabs at a piece of the TAX PIE, regardless of how much they contribute to it. California is an example of what people like Alfonso like to see and people like us really HATE to see: More than half of all state income taxes are paid by the top 1.6 percent of wage-earners. The richest 215,000 Californians collectively pay more income taxes than the other 13.2 million taxpayers. Source: http://democrats.assembly.ca.gov/members/a55/News/an552003010.htm In california, we are fricken communists and just dont know it yet peace axeman
If my previous quote about california tax payers isn't a wake up call and you don't think socialistic ideas have become a problem in the US, check this out: http://mwhodges.home.att.net/fed_budget.htm Take a look at the second chart on the page. (Alfonso probably thinks that rising red line is a wonderful thing ) peace axeman
alfonso, you are a TOTAL M-O-R-O-N! (go ahead and cry to Baron now, crybaby!) i am PROUD that you dislike me!
1) California, largest part of US economy, 6th largest in the world. 2) California - brutally punishes the wealthy by forcing them to pay hugely disproportianate taxes 3) IT jobs going offshore - big part of Cali. economy (IT guys considered RICH by all liberals) 4) The unfairly treated rich are starting to move to tax kind states like nevade, florida, etc California has some SERIOUS issues. You work so hard, yet it's so difficult to build any real wealth in this state. I'm considering moving to another state with better tax treatement, growth, and a lower cost of living as well. What if the top 1.6 of wage earners, that pay HALF the taxes, all moved out of state tommorrow? Wonder what the bleeding hearts would think then? He he... peace axeman
Here is a nice article on for things to come to fuck this state up further: http://www.jillstewart.net/issue0904.html The Worst Laws I Have Ever Seen What You Should Have Been Watching Instead of that Boring Debate (Sept 4, 2003) ~ By Jill Stewart Wednesday's recall debate broke little new ground as meek journalists and inexperienced citizens lobbed softballs at Gov. Gray Davis and the candidates, failed to ask the toughest questions and let false statements go unchallenged. The utter fallacy, repeated two or three times by Cruz Bustamante, that illegal immigrants pour $1,400 more into California's economy than they get back, for example, should have been stopped cold. Look closely at his wording, and you will see that each time Bustamante was asked about all the troubles surrounding "illegal immigrants," he altered his answer and spoke only of what we gain from "immigrants." He well knows, or sure as hell ought to know by now, that an in-depth state audit showed only 19% of illegals bother to file taxes, and the best data on illegal immigrants, from the late 1990s National Science Foundation study, shows that each citizen-headed household in California pays out a net extra $1,178 to shore up 3 million mostly low-income illegal immigrants. Bustamante also knows that underground cash-for-work economy created by the 3 million illegal immigrants in California is one reason income taxes paid to California state coffers are so out of balance. Shame, shame on our newest statehouse liar, Cruz Bustamante. Now, is the $1,400 he cited a figure Bustamante got from some think tank study about how much money our legal immigrants pour into California? Faced with experienced tough journalists, Bustamante would never have gotten away with that kind of slimy word game during a debate. But look at who was doing the questioning: small-market journalists from public radio, a small Bay Area paper and a Spanish-language paper, whose questions about abortion rights and other irrelevancies betrayed their left-leaning sympathies and their intellectual flaccidity in the face of phony Davis propaganda. (Abortion rights in California have never been threatened, despite a number of conservative Republican governors during the past 25 years, and never will be. This is a media/Davis/NOW concoction that the media should slap down now and stop pandering to.) Why was Cruz Bustamante silent during the gross overspending of the Davis years? Why did Davis ignore former chief economist Ted Gibson's data indicating the state's revenue had dried up? Is Arianna Huffington, the anti-tax loophole candidate who uses tax loopholes, merely gathering anecdotes for a book? The questions we wanted to hear weren't asked. The debate merely distracted journalists while some of the worst legislation in years hurtled toward Davis' desk. Let's review some of the worst stinker bills in Sacramento, shall we? · Senate Bill 2 comes closer to socialism than anything I've seen heading for approval in 20 years. It would force California's hard-hit small and medium-sized businesses, with 20 or more employees, to pay 80 percent of employees' health coverage. Companies with more than 200 employees would be forced to pay that for the whole family. Even part-timers get this big perk. SB 2 will spawn layoffs as small businesses pare down to get below the 20-employee cutoff. Bigger struggling companies will close. It is widely known among insiders that key details of SB 2, by state Sen. John Burton, were ghost-written by the Service Employees International Union. I am told Davis recently chatted with the SEIU about this dog. Then, miraculously, the SEIU handed Davis a check for $250,000 a few days ago. I doubt SEIU's bosses care if they wipe out thousands of jobs. The SEIU---and Davis---will merely blame President Bush. The goal here is to co-opt workers before the recall, then let the chips fall. They'll say: "We won free health care for you! We made history!" No kidding. Watch for businesses to stream out of state. · Davis says he'll sign SB 18, giving the obscure Native American Heritage Commission the power to stop development on anyone's land in California if tribes feel construction interferes with a sacred site anywhere in the region. Initially, this turkey included a five-mile zone around each sacred site, meaning construction could be challenged five miles down the freeway from a burial grounds or other site. SB 18 was idiotic, and opposition by cities was intense. But Sacramento is Backwards World. So its authors (Burton again, and also ditzy San Diego Democrat state Sen. Denise Ducheny) changed the law. Now, tribes can challenge development even further removed from sacred sites. Now, there's no five-mile limit at all. This bizarre bill also allows the public to be barred from the Heritage Commission's proceedings. Bowing to religious pressure, the location of the sacred sites will be secret. This means the media will sue very quickly. is would never sign this blatantly unconstitutional bill but for one thing: rich tribes have already poured $2 million into Bustamante's campaign, and money-grubbing Davis wants some. emember how Davis vowed to reform workers compensation because California's is the most expensive yet provides almost the worst benefits in the nation? redicted the Dems would buckle to greedy trial lawyers, unions and others bleeding the system dry. Sadly, I was right. Although you cannot find this fact in the shallow media coverage, the real reforms were quietly killed weeks ago. True reform, proposed in a package of highly detailed bills by the Republicans that copied the top workers comp programs in the nation, were all wiped out in a quiet Democratic massacre over the summer. The media ignored this. A Democrat-dominated conference committee now claims that its heavily watered-down proposal will give major relief to California. It won't. Davis was too gutless to force through the two basic reforms that make all others mere fingers in the dike. First, (although the media rarely explains this) Californiaâs nutty rules allow the workers to essentially determine if they were injured on the job. Many doctors who make their living off workers comp are happy to oblige, proof or no proof. Only three states give workers so much say in this important matter---and naturally California clings more than any other state to this grossly abused and terribly subjective practice. In 47 normal states, determining if a worker was injured on the job isn't largely up to the worker because that would be crazy! These states use "objective standards"---basically, an independent doctor who makes no money treating workers comp, and who utilizes American Medical Association guidelines. But in California, we don't allow independent doctors to make the judgement. The unions view the rampant abuses as a form of paid time off---a perk for their workers. And here's the proof: years ago, special interest groups including the unions pressured the politicos to make it illegal to use the AMA guidelines. Good Lord. Second, when determining if a worker should get permanent disability payments---a huge slice of California's crisis---our Orwellian "no fault" laws encourage the parties to go fight it out for months in court (as the trial lawyer lobby insisted so it could get rich off the system). As a result, 50 percent of all California workers comp cases hit court. In Utah, where independent doctors determine permanent disability, 4 percent of cases hit court. The end result is, truly injured workers get screwed and are forced into court for months, and everybody else from doctors who look the other way to lawyers who string cases along, sucks the system dry. Reforms you'll hear touted this week by less-than-honest media spinners like Los Angeles state Sen. Richard Alarcon, such as capping some medical fees and chiropractor visits, won't end the crisis. The reason highly irritated Costco CEO Jim Sinegal delivered 150,000 signatures from Costco workers demanding reform to the capitol this week is that businesses---and now even the workers---are sick of the lying and delaying out of Sacramento. Costco operates in 36 states in the U.S., but 70 percent of its workers compensation costs come from California. Think about that math. That's as good a measure of the level of corruption and wealth-creation inside California's workers compensation system as any I've heard. The plain truth is, only by copying how the top-rated states use "objective standards" will we see major relief. Any politico who says otherwise is ignorant or lying. Despite the recall, what else is new?
Alright since this is a trading forum lets look at this from a trader's perspective. Say you worked for a prop firm that has 100 in house traders. All of you traded in the same room. Now here is the deal. We all know statistically that 90% of these guys won't make a dime. And then the other 10% will have varying degrees of success. Let's say you are one of the successful people and you make lets say 500k a year ok? Now the office manager explains to you that you are only going to get lets say 200k of that money. So you ask him what about the other 300k which is rightfully yours. He explains to you that trading is very difficult and most of the guys in the room are not making any money. So he is going to take 60% of the money that the top 10% make and then pay off the negative balances the other 90% has so they can keep trading. Of course you notice that many of these guys who are in that 90% don't come in early, they don't stay late, they are lazy, they are gamblers, they have no risk management and they just don't care. But your office manager explains to you that we simply can't have an environment where 10 guys are making a killing and the other 90 aren't making a dime. It just isn't fair. I mean they could get mad and come in one day and just shoot everybody or something. Plus its not good for office moral. So you should just be happy that you are a good trader and make something which is better then nothing. This way everyone in the office is happy. Let me ask you something, if you were a successful trader would you ever want to work at this place? Hell no you wouldn't. What if you were a horrible trader that never saw a paycheck in your life from trading, would you work here? Hell yeah you would. And this is the problem. In any society most of the people will be underreporting and only a small % will ever achieve true greatness. But if you begin to penalize those that do well, then what is their motivation for doing well in the future. They will simply fall back to the mediocre level and when that happens the people on the bottom won't be able to live off their crumbs anymore. Be honest, how many of you die hard liberals would really want this? Don't lie.