Nice job of summing it up 10fords.

Kinda like a tax code that pays someone who doesn't work and punishes someone the more they work. Such a goofy approach would only be present in a work of fiction from 50+ years ago. No sane society would do such a thing.

I remember when I first read 1984 and thought it was fiction!

__________________
1984 300TD 1981 240D

And you were right.

and what genius or contribution was ever associated with Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum aka "ayn rand'? (that anyone would want to take from her?) her books and plays and other scribblings were merely self promotion and self justification of her mean spirited narcissism and misanthropy? "who is john galt? why, ms. rand herself, i would imagine.

__________________
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."

You seem to have an aversion to Ayn Rand (and proper capitalization) kinda like another self promoting narcissistic person that you probably worship. FWIW Atlas Shrugged is the only Rand book I have read in entirety. I really don't care who wrote the book- I just think it is an accurate portrayal of the society we are becoming, and a great story. I am John Galt and you're not.

__________________
1984 300TD 1981 240D

I don't recall any posting in these 12 pages saying AR is great, she's right-on, what a brilliant contribution she has made, etc.

I thought virtually everyone who has commented on her work/philosophy/whatever has been at best indifferent and most have said 'yuck'.

And setting aside her agenda as I recall, from a literary perspective her works were 'dry as toast', plot development of a junior high school student, and I remember as I read it waiting for whatever it was that she was going to do or say that made her so well known at the time.

I was pretty young but could not understand why her works were considered so special.

Interesting to see her actual name.

---

oops, I spoke too soon. 10fords was writing as I was as well.

I agree, that one of her ideas, the danger of the little man who'd rather destroy his betters than acknowledge his own failings is prescient and tragic.

But that idea is not unique to AR and IMHO other authors have done a much better job, both intellectually and aesthetically of presenting that to the audience.

The assumption seems to be that if the gov takes anything it is money gone from me. This is nonsense.

I have built my own roads. It was hard enough to maintain it when I was the only one using it, so I cannot imagine how expensive it si to maintain a highway. My tax money goes to pay for roads and I consider them a bargain.

I have fought my own fires. If you think building a road is tough then try putting out a brush fire. Tax money for firefighters is a good thing.

I did meet a guy once that owned his own airport. It cost $2,000,000 a year US to maintain, but he had a lot of oil money and he liked to fly his jet when he went from west Texas to Dallas. I don't mind my money going to pay for airports even though I don't own an aircraft.

If someone came to me and demanded money or anything else when it was clear it would only be to their good then of course I would object. But paying taxes is not the same as giving money to a demanding freeloader. It is paying money to a body that will use it for the good of all our citizens.

And if we don't like the way the money is being spent we are free to put people into office that will better reflect our views on where the money should go.

A case in point: Republicans vowed to spend our money to develop jobs. So far they have pushed their social agendas and worked hard to destroy Unions, but the job creation thing seems to be largely forgotten. In fact one program that did save over 200,000 jobs, the loans to the Auto companies, has been lambasted by the Republicans as a give away to.... I don't know. The American taxpayers?

And.... If the Republicans has promised to push their social agenda and destroy Unions before the election I would feel different about them. I would know that the majority of Americans agreed with them.

But they did not; they promised jobs. They also promised to get the US out of debt, so their plan is to kill Medicare and pray that unemployment goes to 2.8% a place where it has not been for at least 45 years. Yup, sounds like they really know what they are doing.

Since they are working hard to do things they never said they would do and are ignoring the reasons they were put into office I would think they would be worried about being fired from their jobs.

I wonder why they are not?

Some good points.

No taxes in Somalia. Shakedowns maybe, but no taxes.

__________________
1986 300SDL, 362K
1984 300D, 138K

That may be your assumption or the construction you use to structure your presentation (which is fine) but it's certainly not the only way to present the situation.

If two people receive comparable economic benefit from the government, however it is packaged (infra-structure, services, etc) and one pays $100 for it and the other pays nothing problems (eventually) will occur.

Your other remarks about republicans, conservatives, and whatever other groups you believe are mean/cruel/'ill-informed'/etc is fine. I mean I thought one of the purpose of an open discussion is for people to say pretty much what they want.

Setting aside what is right or wrong or who is or is not a good guy or a bad guy (those kind of battles don't work for me) I suggest that there are very corrosive consequences as much by giving unearned benefits as there are by disproportionally taking from the productive.

While being ironic in my comment I was also serious when I said no sane society would pursue such an approach.

It's unhealthy to the individual, primarily the recipient of unearned benefits and it is unhealthy to the society. Of the three entities I'm identifying; society, over-burdened achiever and undeserving recipient the one who will be least damaged is the high achiever.

Take a pupae in a cocoon. If allowed to struggle through the wall of the cocoon the emerging moth/butterfly will emerge, rest and fly away. If you take a razor and cut an opening in the cocoon the emerging creature cannot fly.

Do the same thing with a chick in an egg. Let it peck through at it will be fine. Cut an opening in the shell and the bird will not develop properly.

Struggling, encountering resistance, persevering is how we grow. Always has been. I've been going to the gym for 10 years. Once I hit 45 I knew if I didn't resist aging I was not going to be happy with my life.

Watching someone come in, uncomfortable, uncertain that they can do this, and in not-very-good shape. Those that persevere do more than strengthen their body. Their character and ability to handle other challenges that life will throw at them are also enhanced.

Should impressionable young people be discouraged from reading this book? Should they be warned about it's intentions? How do we protect our young from this kind of thinking?

We have been doing a great job of this already with union teachers. If a child can't read you don't have to worry about them learning anything other than their socialist propaganda.

__________________
1984 300TD 1981 240D

perhaps, as a cautionary exercise, if the young are exposed to the "randians" on this board, they will see what such beliefs lead to in adulthood?

__________________
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."

Yeah- like being a successful, productive member of society. Can't have that if you want them to be good democrats!

__________________
1984 300TD 1981 240D

I believe Hemlock is the antidote of choice.