Francisco Ferrer

If Obama is "hands-off," under which U.S. president was Gaddafi overthrown? Which president sent weapons to Syrian rebels? Which president dramatically increased drone strikes in Pakistan? If none of these actions occurred under Obama, U.S. taxpayers are due a refund for the "hands-off" expenditures that occurred in the past six years.

True, but must a systematic understanding of economics precede the hypothesis that capitalism is egoism in practice? If your conclusion is "no," did you just prove it? --Brant With regard to the theory that Rand was driven to capitalism by Marx's description of it, I offer nothing remotely resembling proof. It's entirely possible she got the egoism-capitalism connection not from Marx but Adam Smith: It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages. The trouble is Smith was ultimately interested in the good of society, which for Rand was never a priority.

If you wish to review the government's record on animal cruelty, do not neglect the actions of FDR's New Deal in removing millions of pigs from the market in 1933: Part of the implementation included the slaughter of millions of pigs in an attempt to drive up the price of pork, under the Hog Reduction Program of the AAA. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_Adjustment_Act#Goal_and_Implementation As for pollution, consider the fact that the U.S. government is one of the nation's largest contributors to greenhouse gases: http://www.peri.umass.edu/greenhouse100/

True, but must a systematic understanding of economics precede the hypothesis that capitalism is egoism in practice?

from "Judaism, Capitalism, and Marx" by David Gordon Before turning from Marx on capitalism and the Jews, I allow myself one conjecture. Marx said that the essence of capitalism was egoism. Could awareness of this claim have influenced the young Ayn Rand, who after all grew up in Soviet Russia, where the writings of Marx were abundantly available in Russian translation? I ask because she of course also thought that capitalism was in essence egoism, though she embraced exactly what repelled Marx and ignored his identification of Judaism with capitalism.

I've been referencing the Milgram experiments since the late 1960's as a way to explain how tyranny's manacles are "mind-forged" as well as physical. However, a year ago I encountered an article that casts some doubt on Milgram's methodology: The Shocking Truth of the Notorious Milgram Obedience Experiments By Gina Perry

Two questions: 1. Does the corporation tax the residents of the island? And I am not speaking of rents or other market-based fees. 2. Does the corporation act as the exclusive provider/enforcer of justice in the island? If the answer to either question is "yes," then we are dealing with an extra-market phenomenon known as "the state." Note: The East India Company was not a creature of the market but of government charter by Elizabeth I. It exercised military and administrative power in India. Thus, "yes" to 1. and 2. above.

FF: What is your point here? Are you arguing that folks can't reason from a set of facts? A person then cannot test his hypothesis? Hell, what about the American Colonial person who pushed vaccinations by pricking a "pustule" and scraping it into colonist's bodies too inoculate them? A... Ever heard of back issues of scientific journals? Of course, you have. Well, why not forward issues? Come on, can anyone prove that the CDC in 1964 did not have advance copies of those 1976 and 1985 studies that Dr. DeVoon linked us to? And even if they didn't have them, that's still no excuse. Working for the government is no reason not to show initiative. It's elementary. You start with the data available in 1964, extrapolate forward to 1985, see there's a full-blown AIDS epidemic in progress and order up a quarantine of Africa and of any continent that trades with Africa and of any continent that trades with a continent which trades with Africa. Ba da bing ba da boom, no AIDS in the US of A.

Definitive proof 1985 http://www.epiinformatics.com/ADPublications/HTLV1Antibodies.pdf Clinical evidence 1976-78 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_early_HIV/AIDS_cases#1976 Tuberculosis epidemic 1964 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2554833/ Meningitis epidemics 1950-51 http://www.fofweb.com/History/HistRefMain.asp?iPin=ENPP477&SID=2&DatabaseName=Modern+World+History+Online&InputText=%22Nigerian+meningitis+epidemics%22&SearchStyle=&dTitle=Nigerian+meningitis+epidemics&TabRecordType=All+Records&BioCountPass=0&SubCountPass=1&DocCountPass=0&ImgCountPass=0&MapCountPass=0&FedCountPass=&MedCountPass=0&NewsCountPass=0&RecPosition=1&AmericanData=&WomenData=&AFHCData=&IndianData=&WorldData=Set&AncientData=&GovernmentData= Sparsity of achievements by 1 million African immigrants http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_immigration_to_the_United_States#Academia_and_science African immigrants transmit multiple infectious diseases http://fogartyfellows.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Barnette-Role-of-immigrants-in-infectious-diseases.pdf Thanks for the links. That's definitive proof, all right. It took you probably less than an hour to find the links to those studies. A public health official in 1964 could have done the same thing even if his dial-up connection was slower.

All of the money I "pay" in quarterly taxes comes from my clients and not out of my own pocket. You've made it clear that this distinction is lost on you because you have no experience to give it any meaning. A good businessman never regards as his what does not ultimately belong to him. Only profit belongs to me. Never expenses or taxes. This is how to remain solvent... a concept with which you seem to lack any personal experience. From the nature of your comments you'd be a failure in business. Greg Then your clients do not "pay" taxes out of their own pockets either. Their taxes are "paid" by their clients. And your clients' clients? Same thing. They don't pay them. They are "paid" by the clients' clients' clients. And the clients' clients' clients? "Paid" by the clients' clients' clients' clients. That's the really neat thing about taxes. Shhh, don't tell anybody! Nobody really pays taxes! We all just pass them on to the next guy who passes them on to the next guy who passes them on to the next guy who passes them on to the next guy who passes them on to the next guy who passes them on to the next guy who passes them on to the next guy who passes them on to the next guy who passes them on to the next guy who passes them on to the next guy. So what's all the scary talk about high taxes? The U.S. could raise taxes high enough to pay off the national debt in one year and colonize Mars from pole to pole--and no one would suffer financially. It's common sense. Just ask any successful businessman.

What a silly conclusion. You think like a failure, Frank. Capitalism is being both producer and consumer, while producing more than you consume. Greg 1. You wrote "I do not pay taxes." (Post #165) 2. Then you wrote "I pay quarterly business taxes . . ." (Post #167) A is A and A is non-A Apparently your idea of thinking successfully is holding two contradictory thoughts in your head at the same time. You do not pay taxes, but that doesn't mean you don't pay taxes. And the fact that you do pay taxes does not necessarily mean you pay taxes.

This is the most trenchant of Ventura's criticisms. As Sheldon Richman has written, "Despite all its guarantees -- contrary to its ideological justification for existing -- the state can't protect us -- even from a ragtag group of hijackers. Trillions of dollars spent over many years built a "national security apparatus" that could not stop attacks on the two most prominent buildings in the most prominent city in the country -- or its own headquarters. That says a lot. No. That says it all. The state is a fraud. We have been duped." Who is he criticizing, the state or its citizens? It can't be the former for it can't be criticized for what it cannot do. If the Department of Defense cannot defend, it should be renamed the Department of Cannot Do.

The entire Ayn Rand comic book is available here: http://activatecomix.com/162-1-1.comic

"We should have quarantined Africa 50 years ago." Why? Because public health officials in 1964 should have been smart enough to realize that AIDS would be first clinically observed in 1981, and that by 2014 there would be a genetic analysis showing that HIV first emerged in Kinshasa in about 1920.

Just as the Nazis said: Jesus was an Aryan.

This is the most trenchant of Ventura's criticisms. As Sheldon Richman has written, "Despite all its guarantees -- contrary to its ideological justification for existing -- the state can't protect us -- even from a ragtag group of hijackers. Trillions of dollars spent over many years built a "national security apparatus" that could not stop attacks on the two most prominent buildings in the most prominent city in the country -- or its own headquarters. That says a lot. No. That says it all. The state is a fraud. We have been duped."

A man is powerless right on up to the moment when he stops being powerless. For example, early Christians had no control over Roman authorities or the pagan masses. Yet by the end of the fourth century, Christianity was the dominant cultural influence in the empire. There is no basis for the suggestion that the Federal Reserve is forever invulnerable to political, cultural and economic forces. When you exercise power over your own finances there's no need to wait for the tide of history to change. My approach is to learn how to live so that it doesn't matter what the Federal Reserve does. The economic quality of my own life is completely unaffected by the Federal Reserve or the Banks... ...because I have no participation, investments, or financial entanglements in the debt/credit system. Greg Red herring. Finding ways to circumvent the Fed is an entirely separate issue from the claim that no one can control the Fed. The central bank was created by humans and can be ended by humans. Well, it's the only issue that matters to me. I pick battles I can actually win, instead of impotently flailing away at sure losers. Everyone else is on their own to try to figure things out for themselves because I can't live their lives for them... only my own. I take the Galt's Gulch approach by simply refusing to participate in a corrupted economic system. That's also a two way street. Conversely, because I don't participate, that corrupted system has no control over my financial wellbeing. Problem solved! Greg Glad to hear you've stopped paying taxes. I don't pay taxes. My clients do. This is Business 101, so I'm surprised you don't know this. Taxes are just another cost of doing business which is already built into the selling price of goods and services. And operating without a debt load makes it easy to be highly competitive. I believe we've been down this road before, Frank. Do you really need to do it all over again? Greg I see. You don't pay taxes; your clients do. So apparently you are nobody's client. You buy no products or services from those who do pay taxes. That means you made your own car, computer, television, cell phone, refrigerator, light bulbs, pencils and toilet paper from the raw materials on your own land in Galt's Gulch and are thereby able not to "to participate in a corrupted economic system."

A man is powerless right on up to the moment when he stops being powerless. For example, early Christians had no control over Roman authorities or the pagan masses. Yet by the end of the fourth century, Christianity was the dominant cultural influence in the empire. There is no basis for the suggestion that the Federal Reserve is forever invulnerable to political, cultural and economic forces. When you exercise power over your own finances there's no need to wait for the tide of history to change. My approach is to learn how to live so that it doesn't matter what the Federal Reserve does. The economic quality of my own life is completely unaffected by the Federal Reserve or the Banks... ...because I have no participation, investments, or financial entanglements in the debt/credit system. Greg Red herring. Finding ways to circumvent the Fed is an entirely separate issue from the claim that no one can control the Fed. The central bank was created by humans and can be ended by humans. Well, it's the only issue that matters to me. I pick battles I can actually win, instead of impotently flailing away at sure losers. Everyone else is on their own to try to figure things out for themselves because I can't live their lives for them... only my own. I take the Galt's Gulch approach by simply refusing to participate in a corrupted economic system. That's also a two way street. Conversely, because I don't participate, that corrupted system has no control over my financial wellbeing. Problem solved! Greg Glad to hear you've stopped paying taxes.

A man is powerless right on up to the moment when he stops being powerless. For example, early Christians had no control over Roman authorities or the pagan masses. Yet by the end of the fourth century, Christianity was the dominant cultural influence in the empire. There is no basis for the suggestion that the Federal Reserve is forever invulnerable to political, cultural and economic forces. When you exercise power over your own finances there's no need to wait for the tide of history to change. My approach is to learn how to live so that it doesn't matter what the Federal Reserve does. The economic quality of my own life is completely unaffected by the Federal Reserve or the Banks... ...because I have no participation, investments, or financial entanglements in the debt/credit system. Greg Red herring. Finding ways to circumvent the Fed is an entirely separate issue from the claim that no one can control the Fed. The central bank was created by humans and can be ended by humans.

A man is powerless right on up to the moment when he stops being powerless. For example, early Christians had no control over Roman authorities or the pagan masses. Yet by the end of the fourth century, Christianity was the dominant cultural influence in the empire. There is no basis for the suggestion that the Federal Reserve is forever invulnerable to political, cultural and economic forces.

"What are some of your favorite AR quotes?" You mean before or after she was bowdlerized by David Harriman?

http://the-toast.net/2014/09/26/ayn-rands-buffy-vampire-slayer/ GILES: In every generation there is a Slayer. She is the Chosen One. She alone will stand against the forces of darkness – BUFFY: What does it pay? GILES: What do you mean? BUFFY: I’m being expected to risk my personal health and well-being on behalf of those too weak to fend for themselves, yes?

Reputation is everything. Therefore, a person who has been defrauded is not entitled to his money back because the seller has already suffered enough.

Frank: You remind me of the major league relief pitcher who is a one pitch pitcher...and can't hear or see any other way to get the ball to the plate. The point everyone is trying to make to you is that NO FUCKING LAW EVER PREVENTS THE CRIME... Yet you stridently wish to go on your reductio ad absurdom pitch... Can you you not see their argument? I would love to see you restate the person's argument before you launch that one pitch you rely on. It would definitely lower your ERA [earned run average]. A... 1. A sells B a "certified diamond ring." Ring turns out to be a chunk of glass. Is B morally entitled to the return of his money? Answer: No. Reason? No law prevents crime. 2. A slugs B in the face and breaks his jaw. Is B morally entitled to require B to pay hospital expenses? Answer: No. Reason? No law prevents crime.

You pointed to $80 billion in insurance fraud. Put it in context. (fraud = 0.0006% of commercial insurance in force) Commercial insurance in force $20 trillion life $30 trillion accident & health $75 trillion property & casualty $125 trillion Next, you point to Bernie Madoff: $36 billion invested, $18 billion paid out + $8 billion recovered = $10 billion loss (loss = 0.00001% of total investor funds under management) Investor Funds $28 trillion pension assets $15 trillion mutual funds $15 trillion commercial bank assets $10 trillion net home equity $10 trillion retail stock investors $5 trillion 401k and IRAs $83 trillion There are 3.2 million people engaged in law enforcement, firefighting, regulation, etc (1% of U.S. population) Since fraud is such a tiny, tiny part of the big picture, is there any point in even enforcing laws against fraud? A lies to B and sells B $100,000 in worthless securities. B is now out $100,000. B complains to the police. The police calmly explain to B that 1. "Stock brokers do not prosper by robbing idiots." 2. Fraud is just a small part of our huge economy. B sees the logic in all this is happy to have been the recipient of such a powerful moral lesson. The End