Online reading group and book discussion forum
  HOME ENTER FORUMS OUR BOOKS LINKS DONATE ADVERTISE CONTACT  
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sat Jul 20, 2019 4:54 am





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
The perils of Objectivism 
Author Message
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Wearing Out Library Card


Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 243
Thanks: 2
Thanked: 24 times in 23 posts
Gender: None specified

Post Re: The perils of Objectivism
All entitlement programs in laissez-faire capitalism would be phased out. It wouldn't happen overnight.
Cost would be determined by the market and upon what type of education, etc.


_________________
"Better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self."
- Cyril Connolly

My seven published books are available for purchase, click here:
http://www.amazon.com/Steven-L.-Sheppard/e/B00E6KOX12


Sun Dec 09, 2012 2:03 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7040
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1071
Thanked: 2064 times in 1656 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The perils of Objectivism
Quote:
All entitlement programs in laissez-faire capitalism would be phased out. It wouldn't happen overnight.
Cost would be determined by the market and upon what type of education, etc.


So the eventual stratification of education ensures that lineages will carry on much as they did in medieval times. Only rich kids can afford educations that would land them jobs that compensate well. Middle class and poor will be forced to buy bargain education for their children, ensuring that they only get service level jobs. Children in modern America would no longer be "entitled" to equal education, as if the use of the word "entitle" is a bad thing.

On top of this, public subsidized childcare such as ASES would become nonexistant. Parents who currently work two jobs just to make ends meet would no longer be able to, since their children would need to be taken care of instead.

Faced with the option of paying most of their money to put their kids through school, and putting food on the table, the percentage of uneducated children would rise sharply. Without child protection laws, these children would be put to work in entry-level menial jobs such as agriculture or low-wage manufacturing. What other choice would families have?

Again, this is the tip of the iceberg for inequality. There is enough to write about on that subject alone that it can't all be mentioned here.


A fourth peril of Objectivism would be the failure of infrastucture. First, we'd see a transition that MrA mentions. Roads would all be fee-based, utilities would all increase drastically in price, including gasoline for cars. Unable to pay to use roads or vehicles, the poor class would resort to animals and bicycles for transportation, such as what we see in the cities of India. The cities with a decent sized population with enough money to afford vehicles would only be able to afford those without standards, bringing smog back to our cities in only a few short years after the transition starts.

Zoning and property development would run amok, leaving neighborhoods in a shambled hodgepodge that resembles the nastiness we see on TV in places such as Somalia and Brazil. Tin sheeting for roofs and car doors for windows. Waterways would all be devastated by pollution and other uncontrolled externalities. Our food supply would degrade and the headlines of food poisoning and starvation would be so common that it would soon be ignored.


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


The following user would like to thank Interbane for this post:
JamesALindsay
Sun Dec 09, 2012 3:46 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7040
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1071
Thanked: 2064 times in 1656 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The perils of Objectivism
Quote:
We are reason-heads, we use our heads, our minds, we do not abandon reason for faith. We use logic, not ad hominems, like you. Nothing in Objectivsm's structure is accepted on faith, only reason. So your claim is totally unsubstantiated.


The same "reason" that elevated Communism to such a trusted ideal before it was actually put into practice. The same "reason" that supports 'theories' such as the flat-Earth theory, hollow-earth theory, phlogiston theory, etc.

Reasoning is not enough. How often across history have reasonable ideas turned out to be false? Reality has a way of making even the greatest ideas seem quite stupid in hindsight, after implementation.


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


Sun Dec 09, 2012 3:49 pm
Profile
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Master Debater


Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 23
Thanks: 8
Thanked: 16 times in 8 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The perils of Objectivism
Interbane wrote:
Reasoning is not enough. How often across history have reasonable ideas turned out to be false? Reality has a way of making even the greatest ideas seem quite stupid in hindsight, after implementation.


More accurately, reasoning upon bad assumptions (bad axioms underlying the logico-axiomatic system, specifically) returns bad results. Objectivism operates on very bad assumptions, and thus its conclusions appear logical from the inside and disastrous from the outside. Since it is an ideology, outside happens to be where reality lives, and so in practice, it would be an utter trainwreck.


_________________
Writer, mathematician, Southerner, atheist.
Author of God Doesn't; We Do: Only Humans Can Solve Human Challenges
Or see my blog: God Doesn't; We Do--Blog
God doesn't exist, almost surely.


The following user would like to thank JamesALindsay for this post:
Interbane
Sun Dec 09, 2012 3:55 pm
Profile Email WWW
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
Master Debater


Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 23
Thanks: 8
Thanked: 16 times in 8 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The perils of Objectivism
Mr A wrote:
All entitlement programs in laissez-faire capitalism would be phased out. It wouldn't happen overnight.
Cost would be determined by the market and upon what type of education, etc.


Do be very careful with that loaded word "entitlement." What Objectivists seem to miss, while calling these things "entitlements" is that they aren't entitlements, they are the benefits of a social insurance program that benefits the entire society that has them in place, which is what justifies people paying for them via taxes. One could say that the value of a rich person paying way more for some poor kid's education is that the rich person doesn't have to live in a society full of uneducated people that make piss-poor decisions and aren't able to do high-end work.

In another vein, one could say that the value of a rich person paying way more for some elderly person's retirement is that the rich person doesn't have to live in a society full of starving old people who have to do things like choose between medicine and food (which is a moral outrage in any rich society). Since Objectivists are too disgustingly self-absorbed to possibly see the benefit in this from a moral standpoint, as their ideology completely warps their moral framework away from anything salient, one could say that it will provide the opportunity to live in a society not burdened by old beggars nastying up the place and constantly begging for stuff with desperate younger relatives committing crimes to obtain basic needs.

In yet another vein, one could say that the value of a rich person paying way more for the poor in general to be able to live is essentially the same: reduced poverty is a moral force unto itself, but pragmatically speaking, criminals and most of the other ills of society that rich people would have to insulate themselves from (at greater cost if there are more of them, particularly when they hit the breaking point and riot en masse) are far less problematic in a society in which desperate need isn't driving so much of the crime.

In yet another vein, one could say that the value of a rich person paying way more for environmental regulations on business, in addition to the implicit costs associated with running a regulated business, vastly, vastly outweigh the costs of a ruined environment, which will ruin not only the poor but eventually the rich as well. If climate change isn't attended to relatively soon, MIT scientists are predicting a minimum of $180 trillion ($180,000,000,000,000) (more than 10xGDP) in damages arising from environmental problems within the next three decades. For another comparison, there is roughly $27T worth of oil still in the ground, including how scarcity will drive its value up as it becomes more and more scarce. This will literally destroy the global economy. This global economic catastrophe will be big enough to impact the rich in their luxurious, pretend-the-world-isn't-there-or-hurting islands, if not enough to ruin them outright.

We could go on and on and on with these things. The problem for the Objectivist is that the "laissez-faire" free market has absolutely no mechanisms to deal with these problems, pretend as it may. Self-regulating businesses will pay the price of being undercompetitive and therefore will not act until it becomes cost-effective to do so, which is predicted to actually be many times over too late (e.g. the oil thing: the estimate is that if even a quarter of that $27T in oil is recovered and burned, we will have probably broken the environment to the tune of many, many times over that in damages to the environment). Since the free market does not put a premium on the value of commons like the air or water quality or composition, it is the primary driver of the tragedy of the commons, a fact they try to put off on collectivist systems like governments which are the only entity that can actually protect the real commons that cannot be easily monetized.

In this, it is insanely important to understand that governments are not some "other" out there that imposes will or whatever nonsense the Objectivist will use to label government action and programs. The government, in a democratic society, is the extension of the will of the people, essentially all of us when the democracy is healthy and functioning (ours in the US is currently not--we suffer from a severe deficit of democracy here due to the exact kinds of moneyed special interests that laissez-faire capitalism and Objectivist principles allow the affluent to buy). The people want clean air and a reasonable degree of assurance about the future for themselves and their children, and they want a fair shake at opportunities, all of which are secured by collecting the will of the people into the instrument called government.


_________________
Writer, mathematician, Southerner, atheist.
Author of God Doesn't; We Do: Only Humans Can Solve Human Challenges
Or see my blog: God Doesn't; We Do--Blog
God doesn't exist, almost surely.


Sun Dec 09, 2012 4:11 pm
Profile Email WWW
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7040
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1071
Thanked: 2064 times in 1656 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The perils of Objectivism
Bill Maher on minimum wage. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4InCis9FH6c

"When it comes to raising the minimum wage Conservatives always say it is a non-starter because it cuts into profits. … You might think that paying people enough to live is so self-evident that even crazy people could understand it. But you would be wrong. …

Michele Bachmann is not only against raising the minimum wage, she is against having one at all. She wants said “… if we took away the minimum wage … we could … virtually wipe out unemployment … because we would be able to offer jobs at whatever level.” …

And naturally Ted Cruz agrees. Ted Cruz thinks it’s a good thing that when his Cuban father came to America he was paid fifty cents an hour to work as a dishwasher. …

When did the American dream become this pathway to indentured servitude, this economic death spiral where workers get paid next to nothing, so they can only afford to buy next to nothing, so businesses are forced to sell cheaper and cheaper shit?

Consider the fact that most fast food workers whose average age by the way is 29 … are on some form of public assistance which is not surprising. When even working people can’t make enough to live they take money from the government.

This is the question the Right has to answer. Do you want smaller government with less handouts or do you want do you want a low minimum wage because you cannot have both. If Coronel Sanders isn’t going to pay the lady behind the counter enough to live on, then Uncle Sam has to. And I for one is getting a little tired of helping highly profitable companies pay their workers."


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


Sun Nov 03, 2013 7:37 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7040
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1071
Thanked: 2064 times in 1656 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The perils of Objectivism
A kid growing up in an Objectivist household. How Ayn Rand ruined my childhood.


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


Sun Nov 03, 2013 8:10 pm
Profile
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

Gold Contributor

Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 5481
Thanks: 1302
Thanked: 889 times in 763 posts
Gender: None specified
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The perils of Objectivism
"It read: “My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.” As a little kid I interpreted this to mean: Love yourself. Nowadays, Rand’s bit is best summed up by the rapper Drake, who sang: “Imma do me.”

Ya, I'd do me real hard.



Sun Nov 03, 2013 8:52 pm
Profile Email
User avatar
Years of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membershipYears of membership
BookTalk.org Hall of Fame

BookTalk.org Moderator
Gold Contributor

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 7040
Location: Da U.P.
Thanks: 1071
Thanked: 2064 times in 1656 posts
Gender: Male
Country: United States (us)

Post Re: The perils of Objectivism
Objectivism would be the best thing ever if I were the only one allowed to follow it.


_________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” - Douglas Adams


Sun Nov 03, 2013 8:54 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ] • Topic evaluate: Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.Evaluations: 0, 0.00 on the average.  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:



Site Resources 
HELPFUL INFO:
Forum Rules & Tips
Frequently Asked Questions
BBCode Explained
Author Interview Transcripts
Be a Book Discussion Leader!

IDEAS FOR WHAT TO READ:
Bestsellers
Book Awards
• Book Reviews
• Online Books
• Team Picks
Newspaper Book Sections

WHERE TO BUY BOOKS:
• Great resource pages are coming!

BEHIND THE BOOKS:
• Great resource pages are coming!

PROMOTE YOUR BOOK!
Advertise on BookTalk.org
How To Promote Your Book





BookTalk.org is a thriving book discussion forum, online reading group or book club. We read and talk about both fiction and non-fiction books as a community. Our forums are open to anyone in the world. While discussing books is our passion we also have active forums for talking about poetry, short stories, writing and authors. Our general discussion forum section includes forums for discussing science, religion, philosophy, politics, history, current events, arts, entertainment and more. We hope you join us!


Navigation 
MAIN NAVIGATION

HOMEFORUMSOUR BOOKSAUTHOR INTERVIEWSADVERTISELINKSFAQDONATETERMS OF USEPRIVACY POLICYSITEMAP

OTHER PAGES WORTH EXPLORING
Banned Book ListOnline Reading GroupTop 10 Atheism Books

Copyright © BookTalk.org 2002-2019. All rights reserved.
Display Pagerank