caroljane

A quick Google showed that Barnett and Levin debated each other in 2012 (not on this subject though). As a scholar Levin surely is aware of Barnett'sn his work in his subject of interest. I bet he acknowledges it in his book.

... but not entirely irrational, for Beta Doug. This is in light of the many who post his same views in the US in their own names and remain unmolested. I suspect he just does not want the hassle of defending his opinions in the real world to the unsympathetic; Beta Doug does not strike me as the bravest of characters. As for Superdoug, he is fearless anyway.

I would say imagined

Very interesting information. The UIs certainly are not all bad. Anyone whoever had a child, planned and prepared for and scheduled more efficiently than D-Day, has found this out!

Which Doug? Mild-mannered beta gaming hobbyist Clark Kent, or Solo Superswaggerman?

lol nice theme song for "Doug Bandler"!

I assumed his real name was "Doug Bandler," but I don't see anything wrong about using a different name and not letting other people in on it. -Neil Parille Well, Lindsay P's posting guiidelines see something wrong with it. The alphamale photo was fake too, of course. If this is a bright guy give me a stupid one everytime!

No one blames him for that. It was signing on as a forum member under the false identity letting everyone believe it his true one that is being objected to. He could have used a screen name and protected his real one, but obviously did not have enough respect for the site or its owner to do that. Seriously bad faith.

Methinks thou art an intellectually psychological voyeur... I bet you don't talk to Drudge and Breitbart that way! Carol deeply offended PS do you have any spare field glasses you could lend me?

Hee-hee, they are still at it. Somebody has been charged with rationalizing in his use of words and he does not accept the charge! Eat your heart out, The Young and the Restless.

One of my total favourite movies. I am a sucker for service comedies anyway,, the older the better. Thanks Adam, reminds why I was stupid enough to enlist in OL!

Frediano, Your analysis here is highly informed, and persuasive. I have no economics background or knowledge to challenge it in any way. I think you may well be right' As to unions, do not faint but I completely agree that if they cannot provide services to groups of workers in the future, they will naturally wither away. But being me, I think that unintended consequences are often more impactful than reliably-predicted outcomes, since economies like everything can only predicted based on past variables/ And as to beliefs I think that humanity and society, which may or may not exist, are as a whole greater than the sum of their parts, and difficult to predict only based on those parts.

Carol,We aren't agreeing on morality. Additionally, you regularly state your blanket opposition to hand guns, and death by ~ whatever ~ the circumstances.No If the morality is muddy, as between two, known, violent gangsters - the one, defending himself - then neither deserves moral support. (Though legally, the self-defender should be exonerated.) But it's not always so ambivalent. In my morality, the person who values his own life - and by extension, all life - enough to protect it to the utmost - against an aggressor who by definition, has little value for his own life, and by...etc, - is of far higher morality: rationally selfish morality. No, we cannot agree on morality, as we cannot agree that we hold the same basic premises and my A is not your A. I do know from my own premises, that you are a highly moral man. You strive never to be smaller than your philosophy. I think you fail at that much less than you think you do. I know that I am always smaller than mine. I feel privileged to know you.

For those who are puzzled or annoyed by these references to another forum, I apologize, as a person who sees such threads as I referenced as human sagas of weirdly fascinating sociological and even political interest. This is probably because there is something very wrong with me. "Doug Bandler" registered on Solo with a false name and photo, because the views he proceeded to spout, could have endangered his livelihood and even his life. He lives in the US, and the whole country would be too dangerous for him if people he knew read the stuff he wrote .(even though he "sort of works for himself in finance" according to him) He became a favourite of the forum owner and many regulars. He eventually attracted the enmity of another member, who objected to his personal sexual morality (hint: he doesn't have any) and pushed until he got an admission that "Doug" was a [phony. Oy, vey. Such a stramash. The righteously-indignant outer of the fake is getting the usual reward for being right Another anti-Dougger, is getting the one-two punch from Lindsay and M.Moeller, because Linz called him a "f**ing liar" six years ago, and he is still mad about . Following so far? I do think Perigo should have some empathy here. Someone called him an alcoholic six years ago, and he still seems pretty mad about that. That is all you need to know really.. I can't help it if my main studies were in History. I might just check if there are any new posts..yes, I know. Something clearly wrong....

The Americans who choose to live as expatriates are "true patriots of Liberty" for renouncing their citizenship to avoid taxes? I think I have heard that the original Patriots stayed home and fought the unjust taxes. TAS semantics is a wonderful thing.

Could not agree more and cannot wait for you humans to arrive down here. -Orca blanketing with banter as usual

Oh, dear. Still working on linking skills. It is the Men on Strike thread which is up over 100 posts now. I confess I will miss Mr Sex and Not Too Many Drugs, Honest. Not least for his literary insights. His only criticism of Atlas was that Rand portrayed Dagny as in her mid thirties and therefore too old for him to fantasise about. Carol I read Solo so that you don't have to I am altruistic that way, like Drudge and Breitbart

Tony, The rich/individualist part had nothing to do with it. Someone said \I was prejudiced against those two groups of people, which I am not, and prejudiced against handguns, which I am. The two threads of argument overlapped. Since the morality of the killer and the killed so often, to me, is discernibly often equal, and the circumstances of killing so often obscure, I guess I am stuck with my muddy sentimentality.

I don't know about the bathrooms, but how about long tall Florida where the privatization of the school system will get some meritorious students (by sheer coincidence, kids of the privatizers) the best grades that money can buy?

Penance served, with a couple rounds of the Rosary thrown in. You are right, I do substantially agree. And Glenn is very engaging and persuasive when he stays calm. Indeed we are not so very different you and I. And what difference there is, Vive!

Alas, it seems that my mild obsession, not-really Doug, has exited Solo for fresh fields and pastures new. He thinks he might really be a Paleocon, or a Seventh Day Adventist or something. His legacy will remain however, as Lindsay grapples with the mechanics of a new-model Objectivism which will save mankind by depriving women of the vote and deporting all Muslims from everywhere.

Mikee;Accepted with thanks. You have said that I avoid argument and there is some truth in that. I have noticed that winning an argument, or losing it, never seems to change anyone's opinions or deeply-felt beliefs. Good arguers just think up better arguments and bad arguers sulk and fume. I am a mediocre arguer and have done both. To moralist: knowing this person, I think you are right. I said it was a sad story, not an innocent victim one. But it is true that the employee-employer relationship can often become so personal to the employee, the job being such a large part of his life, that he loses sight of his real world rights

Mine and yours. Please have the courtesy to retract your appellation, so that we can continue to communicate.

Just hoping they will not deport convicts there - TASmania?

There are some sad cases of "perma-temps", ie people who work for years at the same job for the same company but without benefits or raises. I know one such person who was "retired" - ie fired, at age 60, although mandatory retirement is illegal. Of course as he had been paid "on contract" he had no pension from the company. He did not want to "make trouble" so he did not protest legally.