About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadPage 0Page 1Forward one pageLast Page


Post 0

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 - 9:16amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
If you can predict how well or poorly the economy is doing in four years, then you'll probably be right about how the public will perceive Obama's performance.  I'll go out on  limb and predict that we'll be in an economic depression and that Obama will be about as popular as Bush is now (maybe less).

Post 1

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 - 12:39pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Don't forget - elections in 2 years - so if nothing improves by then, can blame it on the Dems, and the messiah's popularity will be down a lot...

Post 2

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 - 7:24pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"9) I would never bad mouth a future employer" LOL - Who writes these polls?

Dems know that if economy doesn't improve, or worse, if it goes any more downhill, that their goose will be cooked in the next election. They also don't have a clue (in their philosophy) as to how to make it work, so they will listen to the wiser voices in the finance industry. They will probably preserve enough of the free market to sputter ahead some (at least until after the next elections).

jt

Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 3

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 - 7:45pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jay, I had to smile when you said, "... they will listen to the wiser voices in the finance industry..." That's what the Democrats have been doing, but their idea of 'wiser' clearly means those fellows that managed to stuff their pockets with bailout money and bonuses despite destroying the part of the economy they had been screwing with. I think when they hear "free market," it sounds like a partisan buzzword and just triggers counter buzzwords, like "too big for us to let fail," "we have stop the greedy," "someone has to help out main street." I really think that they don't have a reasoning process that works with the phrase 'free enterprise' - they figure that everyone does the same, throw out the proper buzzwords, avoid making any statement that would cause trouble, and all the while work to serve their special interests and their reelection. And they figure that is what everyone else is doing and doing in just the same way.



(Edited by Steve Wolfer on 11/18, 7:52pm)


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 4

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 - 10:19pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
SW:   I really think that they don't have a reasoning process that works with the phrase 'free enterprise' - they figure that everyone does the same, throw out the proper buzzwords, avoid making any statement that would cause trouble, and all the while work to serve their special interests and their reelection. And they figure that is what everyone else is doing and doing in just the same way.


Brother, you said a mouthful!

Atlas Shrugged is all about epistemology.  The politics is perhaps best expressed in the scene where Dagny wonders to herself how we lost the world to men who are afraid to hold an unqualified opinion about the weather.  Another candidate would be Hank Rearden's encounter with The Boys when he asks them why they believe that the nature of steel is arguable but their whims are not.

"...  they figure that is what everyone else is doing ..."

That is a hallmark of the authoritarian personality.  The idea that other people are individuals is easier to accept if you see yourself that way.  There are few things in life as unforgiving as flying an airplane.  And I have yet to find The One Right Way to Teach (or Learn) How.  We know what the failure modes look like: denials of reality, mostly, with a smattering of misperception or non-perception.  How to do it right?  Hard to say...  I've had about 20 flight instructors and interviewed probably 100 pilots for magazine articles I've written.  I even wrote about the virtues of aviation culture.  I have little understanding of what goes on inside someone else's head, even as we do the same things at the same time.  We're all different.

But among those differences is the authoritarian personality.  Some people just figure that everyone else is like them inside... if they think about it at all...   Without putting too fine a point on it, it is a kind of "intelligence."  I like to think that I know my limits and I appreciate being with people smarter than I am.  I pick up on that, when I am still talking and I get it that they got it the first time.  So, I learn to say it once when I am with them.  And I can talk about different ideas in the same paragraph and know they will put them together.  But, on the other hand, I notice that at some lower bounds, there are people who just do not understand how limited they are.  They think they are normal.

In some way, Ayn Rand just never "got" the Wesley Mouches of the world.  Social intelligence is as valid as artistic talent or mathematical ability.  The thing is, though, that if you see that, if you are the person working alone in your studio or office or laboratory you have to appreciate the fact that as clearly as you perceive them, to that same depth, they fail to perceive you. 

(Edited by Michael E. Marotta on 11/18, 10:25pm)


Post 5

Tuesday, November 18, 2008 - 11:38pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Like Jay, I had to laugh, and ultimately vote for choice #9, since I was just watching the 60 minute interview of BO from last Sunday and turned to my wife and said this very thing!

I will say that I truly like BO in the way he presents himself as a person. It is refreshing to see a calm, thoughtful, articulate person. It's just too bad that he has such a totally flawed ideology.

Regards,
--
Jeff

Post 6

Wednesday, November 19, 2008 - 8:06amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Barney Franks, Wesley Mouch - separated at birth?

Okay Steve... Leave me a little bit of optimism. Please? I do agree with much of your appraisal, but fervently hope the issue doesn't have to be painted in such broad strokes. Even if we can't count on their ethics, we can hopefully count on some knowing just enough to look for self survival - and listening to their intellectual and ethical betters.

jt

Sanction: 16, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 16, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 16, No Sanction: 0
Post 7

Wednesday, November 19, 2008 - 9:10amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jeff,
"I will say that I truly like BO in the way he presents himself as a person. It is refreshing to see a calm, thoughtful, articulate person."

I just don't see this at all. Obama has a way of clipping his words that struck me from the first time I watched him speak. Like a door is slamming shut at the end of each sentence. The feeling this gives me is that he either lacks confidence or veracity. Reading the transcripts of his speeches I don't get this, but watching him speak gives me a feeling of dread.

Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 8

Wednesday, November 19, 2008 - 10:00amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

I agree with Mike. I find the man utterly repulsive on multiple levels. He's a charlatan and a poseur, and you can call him attractive or well spoken only in the way you would find Ellsworth Twoohey to be so.

Post 9

Wednesday, November 19, 2008 - 11:52amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Mike wrote:
    "I just don't see this at all. Obama has a way of clipping his words that struck me from the first time I watched him speak. Like a door is slamming shut at the end of each sentence. The feeling this gives me is that he either lacks confidence or veracity. Reading the transcripts of his speeches I don't get this, but watching him speak gives me a feeling of dread."
Mike:

I understand what you are saying, but I don't get those same feelings until I hear the ideas that BO articulates. However, I've come to realize that I'm not a very good judge of character from "body language" that a person conveys. I tend to give everyone I meet too much benefit of the doubt, typically seeing only the good while apparently making some sort of internal allowances for what others would immediately judge to be character flaws. This tendency has caused me much trouble during my life. My wife is much better at reading people who are untrustworthy, manipulative, or have an unstated agenda. In any case, whether judging his character or his ideas, we agree that he is dangerous.

Regards,
--
Jeff


Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Post 10

Wednesday, November 19, 2008 - 11:59amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ahhhh, Jay, I wish I could leave you with more optimism, but I can't.

You said, " Even if we can't count on their ethics, we can hopefully count on some knowing just enough to look for self survival - and listening to their intellectual and ethical betters."

Nope. If they understood self-survival as we do, they would understand that the global economy was in danger of going into a depression that could only be averted by not preventing certain liquidations from occurring and by not continuing the same practices that they had been. But, take Barney Frank, he wanted to go full steam ahead. He views self survival differently. He sees his survival as a political thing and, as in the past, it requires him to tell lies, make false promises, and arrogantly bull ahead. He doesn't see an objective reality whose rules need to be grasped. He really is a social metaphysician - he believes that if he can fool or convince or sometimes just get away with ignoring others, he will succeed - survive - win. As to "intellectual and ethical betters" - that's too funny, and describing his twisted way of looking at this aspect of others is too ugly to get into.

Their nature is different enough, that given the power of government, it is important not to project normal human traits onto that kind of politician - it would be like projecting a human psychology onto a poison snake and then sitting down next to it.

If you find it hard to see them in that harsh a light, try this: Imagine them as addicted to power, even for benevolent reasons - like wanting desperately to help others. And like all addicts, they exercise an almost limitless capacity for denial and rationalization. Their attempts to survive are as irrational as the misguided beliefs they took into politics.

Post 11

Wednesday, November 19, 2008 - 12:39pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
[Deleted]. I missed Jay's post #6 above! He beat me to it.
(Edited by C. Jeffery Small on 11/19, 12:41pm)


Post 12

Wednesday, November 19, 2008 - 12:47pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Steve,

not even a glimmer... {: (

I completely agree with your appraisal of Barney Franks. He's pond scum.

I feel uneasy about simply demonizing everyone though.

jt

Post 13

Wednesday, November 19, 2008 - 1:48pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jay, you are free to choose your language to suit the degree of warmth you want to show.

Instead of calling him a snake, or pond scum, or a mentally and emotionally twisted malevolence, you can just say that he isn't able to see past what are some unfortunate premises. And the result is that he will consistently act in ways that are harmful to our economy - and given the particular premises he will also never let himself see that is what he is doing or understand that he needs different counsel. How's that? Not to harsh, yet it captures the reality of the man.

Post 14

Wednesday, November 19, 2008 - 4:52pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

SW: "Nope. If they understood self-survival as we do, they would understand that the global economy was in danger of ..."

Dagny says, "They're men aren't they?  They want to live, don't they?" and Francisco asks, "Do they?"
End of scene.

You do commit one error, Steve.  When you tie their survival to the global economy, you have made nine leaps of logic and left them very far behind.  It is true that paper can substitute for gold.  I have that video tape of you at Ayn Rand's last public address.  If I sold it to you -- don't hold your breath -- I'd take your promise without hesitation, scribble it on a napkin.  But, we know that cause and effect are directional. They think that gold gives value and if paper substitutes for gold, then paper gives value and they expect an economy to work with promises scribbled on napkins.

Suppose for that video, you offered to take me sailing, just a couple of hours around your local bay.  And someone else offered me 10 ounces of gold to not go.  I'd laugh in their face.  The looters would think I was being unselfish or non-material.  They lack a very basic understanding about nine levels lower than "the global economy is in danger of ..."  They do not know where value comes from.


Post 15

Wednesday, November 19, 2008 - 8:29pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Steve,

Obviously, as you point out, 'pond scum' is not a particularly informative description. It is more of a hazardous warning label, like the bright diamond shaped signs you see on the back of some trucks. Certainly for the more experienced and literate (such as members of this forum), a simple label like "Ammonia" might suffice, but for the general public a big yellow diamond saying "HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS" is more quickly recognized and thus generally more effective.

The US and Europe have much different views on warning labels for the general public. For instance, if Barney Franks were a pack of cigarettes, the label on the pack would read "Warning: The surgeon general has determined that smoking Barney Frank may be hazardous to your health". Whereas in Europe packs instead read "Warning: Barney Frank kills!" or "Warning: Barney Frank causes impotence!" plus some other brief, but similar remarks extolling the virtues of not smoking Barney Frank.

Sometimes I just think the more succinct label performs more effectively.

: )

jt
(Edited by Jay Abbott on 11/19, 8:32pm)


Post 16

Thursday, November 20, 2008 - 12:13pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"In some way, Ayn Rand just never "got" the Wesley Mouches of the world."

Thank Galt. :)

Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 17

Saturday, November 22, 2008 - 2:23amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Mike wrote:

"I just don't see this at all. Obama has a way of clipping his words that struck me from the first time I watched him speak. Like a door is slamming shut at the end of each sentence. The feeling this gives me is that he either lacks confidence or veracity. Reading the transcripts of his speeches I don't get this, but watching him speak gives me a feeling of dread."

I didn't get that impression from the way he speaks. He seems to ooze confidence. Veracity -- not so much. If he was talking about free markets and smaller government in the same oratical style, I'd have gladly voted for him, assuming someone with that philosophy could get anywhere near a ballot I could vote on.

It's Obama's philosophy of governance -- the philosophy of a statist windmill -- that makes me wonder if he might possibly manage to be even worse than Bush in expanding the power of government, which would be no small trick.

Post 18

Saturday, November 22, 2008 - 6:38pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I'd gather we are going to learn if the government is altruistic or selfish and in what respect.  If the plebes of the US are recalcitrant there is not much he can do anyway. On the contrary he can always be blamed for things that are already set in motion. The economy is self motivated. Every day I work the shop floor and see disgruntled. Yeah the faceless ridiculed factory job you abhor. But that is where your wealth is produced. Every day just like you I risk getting a traffic ticket just to get to work. I recently changed jobs and had the rude awakening.  The only way to achieve gainful employment  was to go through a temporary employment agency. You know the firewall that stops potential harmful people from gaining employment. Of course like the treatment centers these are a gold mine of opportunity Long live the Sophist.
 Now is the time to go to your local fire department and join the local Civilian Emergency Response Team . Teach your kid that the turkey baster is full of hot boiling peanut oil.  Join yer selfish guv and help provide a free place of worship for the Sunnie. You know what sucks. It sucks that you only get to be a Santa Clause for five years. Then you have to teach your offspring how to peel potatoes.
 Yer right I apologize for my out burst and I find that is the most challenging thing about Objectivism. Feeling anothers plight. P.S. AS long as Obama can keep people from being treated like a chain saw tied to the back of a pickup truck. I am willing to work on anything he sends my way. We have a joke for that Back in the bootjack of the Upper Peninsula.  


Post 19

Saturday, November 22, 2008 - 6:57pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
so panic make profit. educate make history .

Post to this threadPage 0Page 1Forward one pageLast Page


User ID Password or create a free account.