Paradise Lost **potential mini spoiler if you intend to read Atlas Shrugged**

[pjclarke]

Like all philosophical works Atlas Shrugged talks in terms of extremes but it does illustrate the flaws in Socialism extremely well and also the reasons why, as long as you have human nature, it will never work. If you thought about the above example in terms of the effort you have put in to be a success or financially well off would you do anything different to the main character? Would you just hand over large amounts of cash to a freeloader (referred to as 'looters' in the book) just because you had it and he didn't?

In that extreme example, no, that is just nepotism. But where does the line lie? I am currently allowing my son to use my LtdCo as an invoicing vehicle for monies he is earning as a summer intern in the IT dept of a media Co, I will pay some of his tuition fees at Uni, he is currently living rent free and so forth. When does such altruism become 'evil'? Rand never had kids, of course.

To go back to your example, I have no problem wih paying taxes, some of which go to providing benefits which the unemployed guy could live on while jobseeking. Heck I did the same when I graduated. As I understand Randism, or at least SO's interpretation, such taxes are theft backed up by violence, which is just nuts.

[SpontaneousOrder]

I am currently allowing my son to use my LtdCo as an invoicing vehicle for monies he is earning as a summer intern in the IT dept of a media Co, I will pay some of his tuition fees at Uni, he is currently living rent free and so forth. When does such altruism become 'evil'? Rand never had kids, of course.

Thats not altruism. Read her work before you criticise it.

[Old Greg]

In that extreme example, no, that is just nepotism. But where does the line lie? I am currently allowing my son to use my LtdCo as an invoicing vehicle for monies he is earning as a summer intern in the IT dept of a media Co, I will pay some of his tuition fees at Uni, he is currently living rent free and so forth. When does such altruism become 'evil'? Rand never had kids, of course.

To go back to your example, I have no problem wih paying taxes, some of which go to providing benefits which the unemployed guy could live on while jobseeking. Heck I did the same when I graduated. As I understand Randism, or at least SO's interpretation, such taxes are theft backed up by violence, which is just nuts.

And not just theft, but objectively theft, with proof of this objectivity somewhere not to be shared. This is a fundamentally undemocratic position as it denies the potential validity of any other view.

[pjclarke]

Thats not altruism. Read her work before you criticise it.

Objectivists commonly take a word, change its meaning to fit their needs, and then complain that no one else is using their definitions. This has often led to confusion in debates, as neither side knew that they were both speaking two different languages

- RationalWiki.

I was not criticising, just asking a question. An answer would be good.

[LisaContractorUmbrella]

So, Lisa, do you think that a democratic Parliament has no more right to mandate compulsory taxation to fund healthcare for those who cannot afford it, than it does to send agents of the state round Spontaneous Order's house to rape him?

I think that there needs to be a rule of law but I don't like State interference where it's not necessary e.g. 'quotas' for businesses to guarantee that they have the correct numbers of women or minority groups rather than allowing the business owners to recruit according to ability. By the same token I also believe that businesses should be given tax relief on private healthcare schemes for their employees so that the NHS can be freed up financially and can therefore give a much better service to the people who need it

[Old Greg]

- RationalWiki.

I was not criticising, just asking a question. An answer would be good.

Yes, I had this yesterday when he used the word mob ('vulgus' in Roman political philosophy) when he meant people 'populus'. Interestingly, in the Roman Republic, the populus was formally the sovereign of the Republic, with a complex set of checks and balance to preserve the property rights and associated power of the wealthy, represent the interests of the plebeians, and keep the vulgus / proletarians in check, while giving them a small seat at the table and certain rights against abuse of power.

But then, my degree in Roman History and Latin fails SO's test of a basic education, so what would I know?

[Old Greg]

I think that there needs to be a rule of law but I don't like State interference where it's not necessary e.g. 'quotas' for businesses to guarantee that they have the correct numbers of women or minority groups rather than allowing the business owners to recruit according to ability. By the same token I also believe that businesses should be given tax relief on private healthcare schemes for their employees so that the NHS can be freed up financially and can therefore give a much better service to the people who need it

And we can have a nice debate about htat - your opinon vs my opinion.

But is all taxation state theft, backed up with violence, in violation of natural property rights?

[ZARDOZ]

I wonder if Rand's views would have matured if she had children?

The idea that there will be some sort of utopia through self interest and laissez faire has been proven to be wrong, spectacularly demonstrated with the Banking Crisis which originated through lighter regualtion/control.

While there is a fanatasy Socialism which sounds good but will never work, there's also a fantasy Capitalism that sounds good but will never work. A mixed economy works best and always will. Because, people act irrationally sometimes, especially when fear or greed take hold.

IMHO.

[Old Greg]

I wonder if Rand's views would have matured if she had children?

The idea that there will be some sort of utopia through self interest and laissez faire has been proven to be wrong, spectacularly demonstrated with the Banking Crisis which originated through lighter regualtion/control.

While there is a fanatasy Socialism which sounds good but will never work, there's also a fantasy Capitalism that sounds good but will never work. A mixed economy works best and always will. Because, people act irrationally sometimes, especially when fear or greed take hold.

IMHO.

But it isn't wrong. What is EVIL is violation of property rights. The social outcomes are irrelevant because you have no right to healthcare, food, shelter, to use the road outside your front door.

[pjclarke]

Hmmmm. The plot of AS puts me in mind of the Golgafrinchans from HitchHikers Guide to the Galaxy.

These tales of impending doom allowed the Golgafrinchans to rid themselves of an entire useless third of their population. The story was that they would build three Ark ships. Into the A ship would go all the leaders, scientists and other high achievers. The C ship would contain all the people who made things and did things, and the B ark would hold everyone else, such as hairdressers and telephone sanitizers. They sent the B ship off first, but of course the other two-thirds of the population stayed on the planet and lived full, rich and happy lives until they were all wiped out by a virulent disease contracted from a dirty telephone.

Except of course in the Objectivist version, only the A ship would be built and the Captains of Industry would head off into the cosmos freed at last from the subhumans, the bureaucrats, the regulators, losers and parasites.