How Is Ayn Rand Still A Thing?

[Dot Com]

All one needs to know is right here: Ayn Rand - RationalWiki

 

[LogikAndReazon]

She had at least one thing right... The ineffectual worthlessness of bureacratic civil servants, corrupt govt hacks, and parasitic socialist dependents.....

Those were just blinding glimpses of the obvious.

 

[rightwinger]

Marxism comrades, is the answer....

Is that you John Galt?

Who is Karl Marx, shitflinger?

Brother of Groucho and Harpo?

 

[rightwinger]

She had at least one thing right... The ineffectual worthlessness of bureacratic civil servants, corrupt govt hacks, and parasitic socialist dependents.....

Those were just blinding glimpses of the obvious.

They have more class than Rand did

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Lets not forget, its entry level workers and central planners that drive economic growth...... Lol

 

[rightwinger]

Lets not forget, its entry level workers and central planners that drive economic growth...... Lol

Everyone knows it is giving tax breaks to billionaires that drives the economy

 

[boedicca]

Lets not forget, its entry level workers and central planners that drive economic growth...... Lol

Everyone knows it is giving tax breaks to billionaires that drives the economy

Or subsidies to billionaires, which is how Barry rolls.

 

[Synthaholic]

By looking at the actual RESULTS of that "help" objectively. For instance, since we began spending other people's money on the so called 'great society'

Which "other people", and where is it written that everything you are able to acquire belongs only to you?

 

[Synthaholic]

There would be no firemen or fires without socialism..... Case closed indeed. For 10 year olds....

Roads neither kiddies.... Lol

^^^ Retard

 

[Synthaholic]

...but on the whole, her philosophy would lead to anarchy since just about any action by government can be perceived as a loss of freedom by someone.

Wrong. Objectivism, just like it's political cousin libertarianism, does not see all government action as wrong. In fact, quite the opposite. We all understand that someone infringing on the rights of another should be punished by government. You steal, you murder, you should go to jail. That's HARDLY anarchy.

Sorry, you don't get to make shit up.

What about taxes for infrastructure? Or do you believe in private roads built by and only for those who privately built them?

 

[Synthaholic]

At least two of your upcoming Republican candidates for president are slavish devotees to her weird views.

So how is she not relevant?

IF they are fans, do they bring her up as much as you do?

Who said she wasn't relevant? You asked a question, I answered it.

I didn't ask a question. Try to pay attention between spews.

Of course they won't bring her up. While she is their guiding ideological light, they know that the rest of the country thinks she's batshit crazy. They don't want to highlight that while pushing her agenda of selfishness.

Yes you did ask a question. Look at your thread title dummy.

OK.

She's not a thing.

Is that because she's been discredited?

You tell me. This is your psychotic rant.

Yes. She's been discredited.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Of course, where would a pitiful leftist be without their envy and greed for the riches of a handful of billionaires.....

 

[Synthaholic]

So why is she "still a thing?" She's a useful political tool for Democrats to use against Republicans. That's why she's still a thing.

Only as much as women on welfare, peace activists, environmentalists, feminists, and vegetarians have been useful political tools for Right-Wingers to use against Democrats.

So get down from your high horse.

 

[Synthaholic]

Well, perhaps you should read her before commenting. She was an absolute supporter of free markets.

Until she was the one in need.

Just another RW poseur.

 

[Synthaholic]

Defense, maybe. That is a common need for everyone in the country. I'm not sure she supported the government building roads.

What makes you think so?

Regardless, Ayn Rand was not an anarchist, which assumes that she saw a role for the state.

Yes, the most limited role imaginable. Defense and law enforcement and due process.

And she probably wasn't all that worried about due process. I'm betting she didn't care if poor people had lawyers in court.

Again, I'm thinking she didn't mind roads being handled by the free market.

A limited role is still a role, and thus implies that she did not support the free market absolutely.

So, do libertarians see a role for the government?

Some do, some don't.

And you?

 

[Synthaholic]

If you're a stoned college freshmen "Atlas Shrugged" is a GREAT read!

you mean a college Republican. Its req'd reading for them. Ask Paul Ryan

Literally!

 

[Flopper]

You two never read the book did ya'?

"Atlas Shrugged".

I read both "Fountainhead" and "Altas Shrugge" Great Fiction.

 

[Discombobulated]

You two never read the book did ya'?

"Atlas Shrugged".

Do you ever find it ironic that the icon of modern right wing pop culture was a Soviet atheist who espoused feminist abortion rights?

 

[Synthaholic]

Of course, where would a pitiful leftist be without their envy and greed for the riches of a handful of billionaires.....

On average, the people on Forbes' American billionaire list released Monday have a net worth of $5.7 billion, up from $5 billion last year. Their wealth is so staggering that the magazine had to raise its "price of admission" by $25 million to $1.55 billion.

Topping the list are the familiar names of Bill Gates and Warren Buffett. But some of the biggest gains went to people who made their fortunes in Silicon Valley.

Mark Zuckerberg is now $19 billion richer than last year. The 30-year-old CEO of Facebook (FB, Tech30)is worth $34 billion.

27 new billionaires in richest list - Sep. 29 2014​

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Wow..... A list of wealthy folk

If only they ummmm, paid their " fair" share .....