Bryce

Atlas Shrugged: Part 1 is available to watch instantly on Netflix now.

I want to know why he issued it and apparently the author doesn't know, either.

The New American

The White House has issued no statement regarding the purpose for the signing of this Executive Order. There is no accompanying explanation of why this power should be placed before the President at this time — or at any time for that matter. Is it in place to prepare for expansion of the hostilities in the Middle East, or is it something to do with his vaunted algae initiative?

Perhaps the President is taking the first few steps necessary to cloak himself in the powers required to "legally" (albeit unconstitutionally) step outside the boundaries of his constitutional authority and ascend to a level of supervision witnessed in all the former republics of history just before their devolution into mobocracy and mayhem.

Adam,

Can you cite a similar executive order? Maybe a search term I could use to find others?

Thank you. I don't always know (or ask) if the person with my up is a decision-maker. And I rarely try to identify if the person is a good or bad influence. I just take the abuse if he or she wants to get in my way.

What do you sell? Are you an outside salesman?

A male customer of mine - who really wanted what I was selling - shut down completely after his wife said, "I thought we decided that you weren't going to get that." That was the most memorable objection I've heard out of all of the "I have to go ask my wife"'s. Heh, I don't remember a wife ever referring to her husband as "the boss".

I think the huge technological advances of recent years are evidence that innovation (innovators) is a good wealth creator, and that it can pull forward an economy damaged by and despite Keynesians. And I'm confident I have those advances to thank for keeping the "bad economy" of the last decade and now from being truly bad.

A country with a weak central government and rival faction(s) does not constitute anarchy. He should have written about commercial successes unhindered by regulation and improved qualities of life. After all, that's what he seemed to want to convey. Instead, the author juxtaposed his concept of anarchy onto a country replete with two warring governments and sharia law, then pointlessly concluded that the current state of affairs are better than under it's former dictatorship.

.

But I'm not aware of any group having not come from a government arrangement.

Bryce,

I don't understand what you mean.

I should've replaced "group" with people. People have been born under governance for all of known history.

I agree with this. That's why I support slicing and dicing power through checks and balances in a republic.

I do not agree that we can eliminate government altogether, since I observe that social hierarchical power structures stem from human nature.

Even on something as benign as an Internet discussion forum, you always have people showing up who want to take over.

Michael

I'm sure. I would take them into the context of the society they live in. I deleted the rest of this post because I had a blank out moment when I thought about it more. Freer people desire less power was the gist of it.

I have never seen any isolated group of people end up in anarcho-capitalism.

I have always seen them end up in some kind of government arrangement.

So have I. But I'm not aware of any group having not come from a government arrangement.

I have said frequently that if we could eliminate the urge to bully from human nature, I would be an anarchist. In an imaginary world where bullying does not exist, I believe it is the best form of social organization I have seen.

My view of human nature is government is an accelerator to bullying. Laws don't promote self-interest and actually disincentivize, in measure to the severity and nature of the law, the need to be self-interested. I'll explain if that sounds like bullshit.

George,

I love the simplicity of this idea.

I just can't help but think about relevance. This is a system made for non-humans, where no one learned authority habits growing up and people are not innately tempted by power.

I prefer to stay with the notion of taming the authority by restrictions instead of redefining it and pretending authority is not embedded in human nature.

The problem, in my view, is that we cannot lobotomize the lower parts of our brains, which seek certain things like power and authority. We can pretend this don't exist, but every case where i have seen that put into practice did not end well.

Even on the simple level of productive projects I have built, every time I ignored the authority thing, other people showed up to destroy my efforts. Bad people act. They don't just react.

We can use the upper part of our brain to devise systems to restrict actions of authority systems, but we cannot blank the very nature of the human response to authority out of existence. It doesn't work.

Here's an interesting thought experiment. Suppose you took a group of criminals--say about a thousand--out of a prison, gave them classes in individual freedom, NIOF, etc., put them on a desert island, then came back in a year. What do you think you will find? Anarcho-capitalism?

Heh.

Michael

Michael,

I gather from your posts (from not just this thread) that to you market anarchism is not a viable society. The best arguments against anarchism seem to still rely on a concept of human nature devolving under anarchy into a gangland or totalitarianism. My concept of anarchy is the beginnings of the highest form of man, a result of his upward existence but not necessarily the pinnacle of his achievements. I see it as a society (for lack of another description) capable of existing only on the condition that man is capable of his utmost intellectual discipline, a trait shared by every man in the society. Anything less from man would never grow into anarchy.

Going back to your experiment: Your example seems to matter only in the context that men who know nothing but a state will form their island society accordingly. I don't know what that education is worth or why you chose criminals over dog-groomers or astronauts. But I believe that human nature moves all men in rational directions when the burden of reason is heaviest. So can you prove that if the criminals each had the intellectual fortitude of the men I described above that market anarchism there, on that island, would not exist?

Broken_crackers, you'll be a wiser person when you realize how embarrassing that post made you.

Verizon Communications chief executive Lowell McAdam has gone on record in suggesting that the company’s biggest rival, AT&T, should be allowed to complete its proposed $39 billion acquisition of T-Mobile USA.

Keep up with the latest technology news on the FOX Business Technology Facebook page.

“That match had to occur,” McAdam said at an investor conference on Wednesday, warning that the government has no choice but to allow such mergers unless it can focus on getting telcos the increased spectrum they need to operate. He continued, “We need to be very thoughtful on what the impacts would be to the overall industry if this is a way to regulate the industry without actually passing regulation.”

“I have taken the position that the AT&T merger with T-Mobile was kind of like gravity,” McAdam told investors. “It had to occur, because you had a company with a T-Mobile that had the spectrum but didn’t have the capital to build it out. AT&T needed the spectrum, they didn’t have it in order to take care of their customers, and so that match had to occur.” The CEO continued, noting that he has told the Federal Communications Commission and other government officials that blocking AT&T’s acquisition of T-Mobile without providing a solution to the current spectrum crunch will ultimately harm American consumers.

Read more: http://www.foxbusine.../#ixzz1YhTXNJu2

Not a glorious defense of freedom to do business but a hell of a lot better than Sprint's position.

Melissa, you might try Front Range Objectivism for like-minded locals. I'm on their email list so I know that they regularly host informal get-togethers. I've yet to attend, though.

Why do you say that?

Officer Helps Stop Driver in Trouble

Less than a year after Toyota's cruise control/floor mat/gas pedal debacle ends comes this guy. In an odd coincidence his cruise control, gear shifter, parking brake, brake pedal, and (seemingly) ignition stop working all at once. And neither the reporters nor the police raised any questions. Toyota (and the NHTSA) found no faults in fighting the first case but still had to pay out millions in damages in addition to recalling and modifying millions of cars in the second. What might Ford endure?

Reidy, I don't have that information. They need it so far as it is a competitive advantage to their business. And if I'm wrong, then why are the affiliate taxes even such a big deal?

Like I told Selene, I wouldn't support the bill. But think about what you just wrote: what tax is Amazon taking a stand against?

I wouldn't support the bill, either. But Amazon wants to play a victim here, which shouldn't fly. From their letter:

We oppose this bill because it is unconstitutional and counterproductive. It is supported by big-box retailers, most of which are based outside California, that seek to harm the affiliate advertising programs of their competitors.

The people at Amazon want and need their competition to charge tax and to be exempt from the same requirement. So what would you call someone who operates a business that exists only if his competition is kept at a disadvantage by the state?

"Objectivist state" implies that non-Objectivists exist outside of said state. So you've got to determine if immigration control is a function of the state. If it's not, how objective would its population be? If you find the answer you'll understand the demographics of the state.

Bioshock's dystopian city "Rapture"

I wondered that, too, but I liked the book so much that it didn't happen. I selectively took from the movie to better my view of the book. I can't imagine physical attributes of characters from reading, so the movie helped fill a lot of gaps. Atlas Shrugged was also the only book I've completed before seeing it's movie. So to me they're separate, Atlas Shrugged and Atlas Shrugged the Movie.

Yes, the act of contributing. I won't support those who are opposed to most of my values (and business...). But I wrote that without thinking my comment through. Those contributions probably didn't make any difference in him being arrested.

I heard about the case but didn't look into it 'til now. I don't think Rajaratnam fits the description of "persecuted minority" because apparently the verdict is his comeuppance:

According to the Federal Election Commission' date=' Rajaratnam has made over $75,000 in political contributions in the past five years. [16'] He has also contributed to the Democratic National Committee and various campaigns on behalf of Hillary Rodham Clinton, Charles Schumer, and Robert Menendez.

No, I work for a custom car audio shop in Denver and used to sell cars. I'm parroting what I found on Jalopnik, an auto blog. I look to the world's progressive vision when I want to know what's ahead for the American auto industry. And I have a hunch this integrated "even playing field" utopia of transit will be on the minds of our future leaders.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/8411336/EU-to-ban-cars-from-cities-by-2050.html

Source:

EU transport area roadmap to 2050 - Vision of an interconnected Europe

"Masculinity" doesn't hold much weight. If their women are an indication, I meet plenty of men who put on an act to be masculine. And I don't think that the women in topic need safety, they want control. I once tried selling a couple who fit my take on the subject. The man led the conversation so I landed him on what he wanted and needed. But then his wife said, "I thought we decided you weren't going to get that." So they had a quiet conversation wherein he caved to his wife, then stood up to me, and they both left. Masculine and safe.

I don't understand it. Why would a woman be attracted to that kind of man and what man wouldn't be repulsed by that kind of a woman?

Bryce,

In your sales training, were you taught the difference between perceived value and actual value?

This point is strongly focused on in the Internet marketing literature, especially in copywriting.

The good ones claim that to be ethical, you should sell the customer's perceived value to him, since that is what makes the most sales, but make sure you deliver actual value. In fact, overdelivering is considered a very good thing, whether perceived or actual.

Michael

No. What do you mean by, "make sure you deliver actual value"?