sean

Members
  • Content count

    64
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About sean

  • Rank
    Member
  • Birthday 02/04/1974

Profile Information

  • Gender Male
  • Location Pittsburgh, PA.
  1. http://gothamist.com/2010/11/28/athiest_bi..._nativity_a.php
  2. Galt's motor

    The problem is State power cost labor to produce and the violence comes when it's time to force people to pay for that lobar. Taking the labor out of it means less of a reason for the State to use force on people. And no, I would not let a burglar come into my house, but I might have a reason to give someone a computer free of charge. I can't think of any reason off hand, but there might be one out there. I just also believe there might have been a reason to just hand over a working generator to the State.
  3. Galt's motor

    Well, I guess the hope would be that people would sit up and take notice that there was an unlimited supply of clean free power and then ask themselves, why in the hell am I paying for something that comes free of charge? You might make a good argument with a business that suckers people into buying bottled water, but a government packaging and selling free power? Come om now, we would be talking conspiracy if that was the case.
  4. Galt's motor

    So, what would have been the difference if Galt just handed his motor over to the State? The why I see it the State would have had to destroy it anyway, right? Not doing so would have put the State run power plants out of a job. That would mean there would be less bills to pay and in turn less bills to tax. I understand that he had every right to not do so, but I just don't see the harm in delivering non-violent solutions into the hands of your enemies. I guess this is why I'm for things like free trade with places like China.
  5. I always get the "you don't like it, then MOVE. There are countries with low taxes rates" and was wondering how an Objectivist comes back at it. Richer countries http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_count...velopment_Index Poorer countries http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_count...rcentage_of_GDP (you can sort by the second column) Mexico: low tax rate, close to us, but it is 53 on the list standard of living list. The lowest tax rates seem to be Muslim, or at least Middle Eastern, countries. Could the argument be made that places like Mexico might have lower taxes, but no one is flocking there because because the threat of violence is greater when you don't pay up?
  6. Saw this coming...

    Anyone who's read Atlas shrugged. Anyone who at least got up to the "fighting murder with suicide" part of the story anyway.
  7. Saw this coming...

    http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/aug2010/inds-a17.shtml
  8. Largest "READ Ayn Rand"?

    Here's another long distance traveling story for you.... Last week I met a guy who was over here in the States from the UK, that is traveling form Philly to San Francisco and back on a loaded down 1964 smallframe 125cc Vespa scooter. My hobby is fixing and restoring old vintage 2 stroke motorcycles and Italian scooters, so when I got a call from him, telling me he just left Philly (heading for Pittsburgh) and was having clutch problems, I said, bring it on by and I'll have a look at it. He arrived the next morning, I took he's clutch apart and long story short, he had to wait 3 days on a new clutch. In the mean time we got to talking about why he was doing something most people would think he was nuts for doing. I ask, are you doing this for a charity? He said no, and we both agreed that there would be nothing wrong with doing so, if that's what he wanted to do. He then told me he's doing it for purely selfish reasons and yet again, we both agreed that was a good thing when applied with rationality. Wow, It's always nice to meet someone so honest with themselves and others about the world. We got to taking and I come to find out he's never hear of Ayn Rand. This was no surprise. A lot of people I have met in the Uk have never ether. We talked back and forth about the principles of Objectivism and he seemed very interested, so after we got the new clutch in, I give him a copy of 'We The Living' and sent him on his way. Before he left I strongly insisted that my labor and guest room would be free. telling him that his good company was enough payment. But would you know it, when I went up to clean the guest room, I found it had already been cleaned and on the night stand there was cash and one of his books (Death of a Salesmen) left for me. Ah, the world is a wonderful place.
  9. It most certainty is the reason. I may have not made it obvious form the start, but that was my intention. You have just failed to conceptualize what it is I'm getting it. The point I'd been trying to make is that people like this guy http://www.youtube.com/user/Tactikalguy1 are going to court, using the defense I mentioned earlier and winning and if more and more people continue doing this, then it will come to a point where in order to actually prosecute anyone we will have to seek the privatization of all public roadways. This is how I think it will happen IF it happens at all. What, do you think government is just going to handed over the public roadways to the free market without a reason? They'll spend us all into oblivion before that happens.
  10. It most certainty is the reason. I may have not made it obvious form the start, but that was my intention. You have just failed to conceptualize what it is I'm getting it. The point I'd been trying to make is that people like this guy http://www.youtube.com/user/Tactikalguy1 are going to court, using the defense I mentioned earlier and winning and if more and more people continue doing this, then it will come to a point where in order to actually prosecute anyone we will have to seek the privatization of all public roadways. This is how I think it will happen IF it happens at all. What, do you think government is just going to handed over the public roadways to the free market without a reason? They'll spend us all into oblivion before that happens.
  11. I know I maybe coming for as some sort of Libertarian nut case here, but every time I ask an Objectivist or a Libertarian how do we go from public force funding of the roadways to the free market privatization of them, the answer I always hear time and time again is 'somehow'. I thought that if I go to the extreme and show how and why we eventually will have to go by way of privatization I might start finding some real answers.
  12. Ah, that would be me. I would have been the victim of force. "Why should I testify or care about you?" You might want to read Rand's The Virtue of Selfishness. I'll save my "is it right to force someone who has forced no one to testify in your defense through the use of force" question for some other thread. Look, I do see where your coming from, but my point is cops, judges and the State by and large care more about what's in your wallet more then they do about your safety. I remember reading once about a police department that was prosecuted under the RICO act for racketeering by setting up speed traps. That is now case law. Hell, even my best friend's a cop and he'll admit it to your face that all he is supposed to do is generate revenue. I personally don't condone speeding or wreckless driving, but yes there is case law on the books about such stuff and if same jerk wants to get away with speeding, drunk driving or whatever, all they have to do is spend some time studying this stuff and their off the hook. http://www.youtube.com/user/Tactikalguy1
  13. Ok then, the same thing would apply to the officer as well. He's a paid member of the State. He might tell you he works for you, but legally his duty is first and foremost to the State. I still don't see how this is not a conflict of interest. The same can also be said about any prosecutor and if I understand it correctly even "your" attorney you hire has to swear an oath to the State. So in the vain of Howard Roark I must now say, how can one present a defense when no defense is possible? Yes, I know that people beat speeding tickets all the time, but this only seems to be done by favor of both the driver and the State not understanding objective law. It seems if people understood property right (rights that do exist) Vs. State's rights ( rights that don't exist) the whole roadway system would have to be sold off to a private citizen in other to have a proper middle man for the State to point to and say, "Here's the person you victimized by breach of contract. Even if you can somehow argue that the cop works indiscriminately for both you and the State and if we can also overlook the "forced giving" it it takes to pay his wages, you still don't have a victim because no ones been hurt. You never had a contract with THAT man. The only thing that happen was,you drove on property that you were forced to pay for and some guy who you were forced to his wage is pulling you over. How has he hurt? What contract did the driver brake? Where's the victim?
  14. Also, would you please conceptualize your argument against it?
  15. If anything, I think it's a good case for privatizing the highway. At least then you would be on one side, the victim on the other and the State in the middle.