2 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Ayn Rand was right about how socialism has progressed to this point. Another great industrialist has pointed this out by leaving Britain for Monaco and telling the European Union, Britain and others why. He is a new hero for a real Objectivist tale. 

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/02/17/britains-richest-businessman-does-a-john-galt/

Great article, sadly.

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brietbart - bought and paid for by Russia.

  • Haha 2
  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

Brietbart - bought and paid for by Russia.

That couldn't be farther from the truth. Ayn Rand is a great anti statist and pro capitalist writer. Breitbart is one of the greatest enemies of Russia, China, and Islam. You are using the Big Lie technique whether you know it or not. 

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ronwagn said:

That couldn't be farther from the truth. Ayn Rand is a great anti statist and pro capitalist writer. Breitbart is one of the greatest enemies of Russia, China, and Islam. You are using the Big Lie technique whether you know it or not. 

Keyword search 'Lebensraum'. This was a discussion within the German government, beginning in the 1890's, to expand eastward, eventually into Russia, with the intent of exterminating the native Slavs and settling the land with 'better' people. It was at that point that Russia realized that it was target of further European military adventures (the first being Napoleon), and it stepped up campaigns to divide the West. This meant spreading disinformation, fomenting racial, religious, and ethnic division, and exposing various forms of hypocrisy on the part of Western powers. This has been going on ever since, and is now global in scale. The Internet has made this far cheaper and more effective.

The 'fronts' for this are customized for purpose. Thus we have Any Rand in one corner, Alex Jones in another corner, etc., etc. As we keep finding various 'conservative' actors representing, or being invited to represent, Russian interests within the US, reasonably legitimate questions start arising about where the money for particularly divisive communication channels is coming from.

I've read a number of Ayn Rand's books. She had personal experience with the Soviet state when she lived in Moscow. Perhaps this was appropriate to the 1930's. This kind of 'philosophy' is a bit simplistic these days.

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Meredith Poor said:

Keyword search 'Lebensraum'. This was a discussion within the German government, beginning in the 1890's, to expand eastward, eventually into Russia, with the intent of exterminating the native Slavs and settling the land with 'better' people. It was at that point that Russia realized that it was target of further European military adventures (the first being Napoleon), and it stepped up campaigns to divide the West. This meant spreading disinformation, fomenting racial, religious, and ethnic division, and exposing various forms of hypocrisy on the part of Western powers. This has been going on ever since, and is now global in scale. The Internet has made this far cheaper and more effective.

The 'fronts' for this are customized for purpose. Thus we have Any Rand in one corner, Alex Jones in another corner, etc., etc. As we keep finding various 'conservative' actors representing, or being invited to represent, Russian interests within the US, reasonably legitimate questions start arising about where the money for particularly divisive communication channels is coming from.

I've read a number of Ayn Rand's books. She had personal experience with the Soviet state when she lived in Moscow. Perhaps this was appropriate to the 1930's. This kind of 'philosophy' is a bit simplistic these days.

So glad to read and informed opinion on this forum. No better basis for uttering an opinion on Ayn Rand than if you have actually read her books. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

Keyword search 'Lebensraum'. This was a discussion within the German government, beginning in the 1890's, to expand eastward, eventually into Russia, with the intent of exterminating the native Slavs and settling the land with 'better' people. It was at that point that Russia realized that it was target of further European military adventures (the first being Napoleon), and it stepped up campaigns to divide the West. This meant spreading disinformation, fomenting racial, religious, and ethnic division, and exposing various forms of hypocrisy on the part of Western powers. This has been going on ever since, and is now global in scale. The Internet has made this far cheaper and more effective.

The 'fronts' for this are customized for purpose. Thus we have Any Rand in one corner, Alex Jones in another corner, etc., etc. As we keep finding various 'conservative' actors representing, or being invited to represent, Russian interests within the US, reasonably legitimate questions start arising about where the money for particularly divisive communication channels is coming from.

I've read a number of Ayn Rand's books. She had personal experience with the Soviet state when she lived in Moscow. Perhaps this was appropriate to the 1930's. This kind of 'philosophy' is a bit simplistic these days.

My understanding was that Ayn Rand saw the devastation communism brought to Russia and wrote to oppose the same thing happening in the US.  I fail to see how that makes her an agent of Russia.

However, let's suppose these people are, as you claim, tools of Russia.  Napoleon did, in fact, invade Russia.  Germany did, in fact, invade Russia.  The US did, in fact, spend several decades opposing Russia.  Russia isn't wrong to defend itself.  Why are we so certain Russia is the bad guy?  What have they done to earn our undying hatred?

Personally, I don't understand the reflexive opposition to Russia.  The US regularly deals with shady people.  We even prop them up when it suits our needs.  By world standards, Russia is a fairly benign, stable country.  The Soviet Union fell 30 years ago; why do we still treat Russians like the enemy? 

  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

Brietbart - bought and paid for by Russia.

IN YOUR DREAMS....

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

16 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

Keyword search 'Lebensraum'. This was a discussion within the German government, beginning in the 1890's, to expand eastward, eventually into Russia, with the intent of exterminating the native Slavs and settling the land with 'better' people. It was at that point that Russia realized that it was target of further European military adventures (the first being Napoleon), and it stepped up campaigns to divide the West. This meant spreading disinformation, fomenting racial, religious, and ethnic division, and exposing various forms of hypocrisy on the part of Western powers. This has been going on ever since, and is now global in scale. The Internet has made this far cheaper and more effective.

The 'fronts' for this are customized for purpose. Thus we have Any Rand in one corner, Alex Jones in another corner, etc., etc. As we keep finding various 'conservative' actors representing, or being invited to represent, Russian interests within the US, reasonably legitimate questions start arising about where the money for particularly divisive communication channels is coming from.

I've read a number of Ayn Rand's books. She had personal experience with the Soviet state when she lived in Moscow. Perhaps this was appropriate to the 1930's. This kind of 'philosophy' is a bit simplistic these days.

IRRELEVANT.......

 

my name "Illurion" is russian,  but that doesn't mean i am pro-russian.......

our various Ambassadors to Russia and other countries live in those countries......  are you saying they are somehow "spies" for those countries just because they temporarily lived in the countries that we assigned them to ?

obviously not..

Edited by Illurion
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, mthebold said:

The Soviet Union fell 30 years ago; why do we still treat Russians like the enemy? 

WE don't...   it is Russia that treats US like the enemy...

I suspect it does so for "control" purposes....

Their economy (GDP) is very small in comparison to their population,  and the size of their nation in square miles...

They produce very little in comparison to other nations per capita...  mostly weapons and oil products...

It is my belief that they use "foreign enemies"  as a method to "unite" the people,  who would otherwise be unhappy and feel detached from their own country..

That would explain why the Russian military is over-staffed per capita than most western nations...  to give military jobs to people that would otherwise not have a job available for them to take in the private sector......

China is in a similar situation....  HUGE military staff per capita compared to western nations...  60 million more males,  than females per capita due to the "one child" policy........   

  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russia Russia Russia.........

The only thing worse than us constantly treating Russia as our biggest enemy, after all this time as @mthebold pointed out, is folks labeling any dissenting opinion with which they don’t agree(especially if it’s against regressive socialist ideology) as inspired by, supported by or in support of Russia.  It’s childish and ridiculous.

I’m not suggesting we turn a blind eye to Russia.  I can admit however the US made some poor decisions militarily with regard to NATO expansion and the equipping of those new eastern block countries after the dissolution of the USSR.  Hell, we didn’t want missiles in Cuba for the same reason. 

A bigger threat we face is people who find it convenient to suggest Russia is responsible for the beliefs and opinions of a huge swath of the American Citizenry.  Still don’t get it huh?  Those people are railing against socialist/communist/regressive liberal ideology.  No need for help from Russia in that regard.  No amount of silly Mueller Special Prosecutor indictments of unnamed Russian actors for social media meddling is going to change the truth.  A HUGE percentage of Americans don’t like what the modern Democrat machine or its puppet masters stand for.  That’s how we got Trump.  Calling everything contrary to that a Russian plant or collaborative effort is pure projection.

But folks let’s be realistic, China is way more of a threat on so many levels.  

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

11 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

Keyword search 'Lebensraum'. This was a discussion within the German government, beginning in the 1890's, to expand eastward, eventually into Russia, with the intent of exterminating the native Slavs and settling the land with 'better' people. It was at that point that Russia realized that it was target of further European military adventures (the first being Napoleon), and it stepped up campaigns to divide the West. This meant spreading disinformation, fomenting racial, religious, and ethnic division, and exposing various forms of hypocrisy on the part of Western powers. This has been going on ever since, and is now global in scale. The Internet has made this far cheaper and more effective.

The 'fronts' for this are customized for purpose. Thus we have Any Rand in one corner, Alex Jones in another corner, etc., etc. As we keep finding various 'conservative' actors representing, or being invited to represent, Russian interests within the US, reasonably legitimate questions start arising about where the money for particularly divisive communication channels is coming from.

I've read a number of Ayn Rand's books. She had personal experience with the Soviet state when she lived in Moscow. Perhaps this was appropriate to the 1930's. This kind of 'philosophy' is a bit simplistic these days.

The philosophy is seen in simple terms in her novels, but is a full blown Objectivist philosophy that covers all points but from a materialist point of view. I am a dedicated Christian and a real moderate (not what is called a moderate today). Reading her novels though everything is playing out very much like she thought it would. 

Ayn did not foresee just how vulgar and thoughtless aspects of our culture would become, or the immigration fiasco around the world but that would be too much to ask.  

Ayn Rand is one of the greatest enemies of socialism and communism that ever lived. It is ludicrous to think that she would have any sympathy with Russian totalitarianism. 

Edited by ronwagn
punctuation
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Ayn Rand is one of the greatest enemies of socialism and communism that ever lived. It is ludicrous to think that she would have any sympathy with Russian totalitarianism. 

I don't think for a moment that Ayn Rand was sympathetic to socialism. The point of mentioning this in the context of Brietbart, et. al. is that foreign entities, of which Russia is one, sponsor one or more actors on each side of the cultural divide in order to inflame tensions. Generally the focus is on lurid behavior, catastrophic mistakes, religious insularity, and other events that are designed to destroy trust in a nation's institutions and fellow citizens. Big problems appear when information is one sided - the stuff is convenient for those that want to hear it, the inconvenient facts are left unmentioned. 

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Meredith Poor said:

I don't think for a moment that Ayn Rand was sympathetic to socialism. The point of mentioning this in the context of Brietbart, et. al. is that foreign entities, of which Russia is one, sponsor one or more actors on each side of the cultural divide in order to inflame tensions. Generally the focus is on lurid behavior, catastrophic mistakes, religious insularity, and other events that are designed to destroy trust in a nation's institutions and fellow citizens. Big problems appear when information is one sided - the stuff is convenient for those that want to hear it, the inconvenient facts are left unmentioned. 

What you say is true but I cannot imagine why Breitbart is constantly attacked as being fake. It is a great site as is Fox News. Neither has anything whatsoever to do with Russia. Our nation's institutions have been attacked by those at the top of the Obama Administration. The FBI and the Justice Department tried to undermine and create an insurance policy against the Trump Administration while clearing the Obama Administration and the prospective Clinton Administration. That is where the duplicity is and was. The Deep State has been revealed and it is very powerful. The whole Russia Russia Russia ruse is just a smokescreen. 

Critical Information About the Trump and Hillary Investigations https://docs.google.com/document/d/1choW_wq0D5DfjRPjqLlAkfxCnnVJhRzrHeXppE6D4E8/edit

Part Two About the Obama Administration Scandals https://docs.google.com/document/d/11axnqv_b3L2k9CD6HWNMwrdIECJZSxowxjO4RIc-rbE/edit

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

11 hours ago, TXPower said:

Russia Russia Russia.........

The only thing worse than us constantly treating Russia as our biggest enemy, after all this time as @mthebold pointed out, is folks labeling any dissenting opinion with which they don’t agree(especially if it’s against regressive socialist ideology) as inspired by, supported by or in support of Russia.  It’s childish and ridiculous.

I’m not suggesting we turn a blind eye to Russia.  I can admit however the US made some poor decisions militarily with regard to NATO expansion and the equipping of those new eastern block countries after the dissolution of the USSR.  Hell, we didn’t want missiles in Cuba for the same reason. 

A bigger threat we face is people who find it convenient to suggest Russia is responsible for the beliefs and opinions of a huge swath of the American Citizenry.  Still don’t get it huh?  Those people are railing against socialist/communist/regressive liberal ideology.  No need for help from Russia in that regard.  No amount of silly Mueller Special Prosecutor indictments of unnamed Russian actors for social media meddling is going to change the truth.  A HUGE percentage of Americans don’t like what the modern Democrat machine or its puppet masters stand for.  That’s how we got Trump.  Calling everything contrary to that a Russian plant or collaborative effort is pure projection.

But folks let’s be realistic, China is way more of a threat on so many levels.  

Very well said, but Russia did invade Eastern Ukraine and Crimea. They are very tricky and ran circles around Obama, as just about every other enemy did. 

China, North Korea, Russia, Iran, and Cuba are our greatest concern. They all work together well. 

We should try to convince Russia that their best interests are served by dropping their aggression and benefitting from better relations with the West. They are still trying to weaken Western Europe and advance their influence worldwide. That is what they do. A bad habit that will probably not change. The Russian people will continue to suffer under the status quo. 

Edited by ronwagn
punctuation
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Meredith Poor said:

I don't think for a moment that Ayn Rand was sympathetic to socialism. The point of mentioning this in the context of Brietbart, et. al. is that foreign entities, of which Russia is one, sponsor one or more actors on each side of the cultural divide in order to inflame tensions. Generally the focus is on lurid behavior, catastrophic mistakes, religious insularity, and other events that are designed to destroy trust in a nation's institutions and fellow citizens. Big problems appear when information is one sided - the stuff is convenient for those that want to hear it, the inconvenient facts are left unmentioned. 

Actually,  much of the methods you describe are also used by the Democrat party....  They go out of their way to DIVIDE us,   all of the various "hyphenated-Americans"...........   

A divide to conquer policy..

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, TXPower said:

Russia Russia Russia.........

The only thing worse than us constantly treating Russia as our biggest enemy, after all this time as @mthebold pointed out, is folks labeling any dissenting opinion with which they don’t agree(especially if it’s against regressive socialist ideology) as inspired by, supported by or in support of Russia.  It’s childish and ridiculous.

I’m not suggesting we turn a blind eye to Russia.  I can admit however the US made some poor decisions militarily with regard to NATO expansion and the equipping of those new eastern block countries after the dissolution of the USSR.  Hell, we didn’t want missiles in Cuba for the same reason. 

A bigger threat we face is people who find it convenient to suggest Russia is responsible for the beliefs and opinions of a huge swath of the American Citizenry.  Still don’t get it huh?  Those people are railing against socialist/communist/regressive liberal ideology.  No need for help from Russia in that regard.  No amount of silly Mueller Special Prosecutor indictments of unnamed Russian actors for social media meddling is going to change the truth.  A HUGE percentage of Americans don’t like what the modern Democrat machine or its puppet masters stand for.  That’s how we got Trump.  Calling everything contrary to that a Russian plant or collaborative effort is pure projection.

But folks let’s be realistic, China is way more of a threat on so many levels.  

 

5 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Very well said, but Russia did invade Eastern Ukraine and Crimea. They are very tricky and ran circles around Obama, as just about every other enemy did. 

China, North Korea, Russia, Iran, and Cuba are our greatest concern. They all work together well. 

We should try to convince Russia that their best interests are served by dropping their aggression and benefitting from better relations with the West. They are still trying to weaken Western Europe and advance their influence worldwide. That is what they do. A bad habit that will probably not change. The Russian people will continue to suffer under the status quo. 

There are always two sides to a story............ Russia was dismantled due to false impression of invading into chechnya ......... (naomi Klein - the shock doctrine: the rise of disaster capitalism); Crimea and may be Ukraine... Chaos in Crimea was stirred up by pro-European group ...... They started it aiming to join EU ......... they ran to US Obama so that the then president could order to shell Russia on behalf of them and they could then run to EU freely............... Ever wonder why they didn't ask EU for help instead?.............. and Ukraine is the bread and butter location for Russia........... without it Russia might be crippled........

Love a movie by Morgan Freeman and Ben Affleck : The Sum of All Fear.......... There is a quote I remember vividly (roughly):" Hitler was stupid to fight Russia and America alone..........He should let them fight against each other........"

China was stirred with minority Uighur originated from Turkey; China is now having a trade war with The United States. North Korea is labelled poorly because of the closed dictatorship and its nuclear capability. But behind the scene.... they are progressing well with well dressed and highly well paved road system disclosed by documentary. 

Trump could be the first who could lead to world peace by having good relationship with Russia with his Russian origin and then China and the rest of the world. He was elected for the macho reform or state of the art "you are fired" so that "we make America Great Again".................. And then........ something changed........... He is now at a stand still with Russia; China; Arab and the middle east and everyone in the world......... except the small countries with no economic importance like us......... And a new alternative currency to USDollar is about to be announced.....................

In the game of the rich........ the poor suffer in the middle.......... When we are talking about controling the world...... what do we want to be in control of? Everything especially resources and capital or how things can be done efficiently? Well....... be prolific enough so that you can sire into the top 0.1% level of officers in every country to produce the leaders you can trust to be obedient of..... no?? Other wise if one elects puppets...... the results may vary........... human capability is just not the same........ some people born with the quality; some people born without; some people are worst that not even training could equip them with what is required............... worst are those who are not competitive enough ruining those whom they think might be able to move ahead given equal chance and leverage..........

if we have a plan......... plan thoroughly............ no? quarter way into things making all half suffer- half bemused........... no??

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2019 at 9:15 AM, mthebold said:

My understanding was that Ayn Rand saw the devastation communism brought to Russia and wrote to oppose the same thing happening in the US.  I fail to see how that makes her an agent of Russia.

However, let's suppose these people are, as you claim, tools of Russia.  Napoleon did, in fact, invade Russia.  Germany did, in fact, invade Russia.  The US did, in fact, spend several decades opposing Russia.  Russia isn't wrong to defend itself.  Why are we so certain Russia is the bad guy?  What have they done to earn our undying hatred?

Personally, I don't understand the reflexive opposition to Russia.  The US regularly deals with shady people.  We even prop them up when it suits our needs.  By world standards, Russia is a fairly benign, stable country.  The Soviet Union fell 30 years ago; why do we still treat Russians like the enemy? 

I met Ayn at her final public appearance.  Her talk was prophetic, predicting the breakup of the Soviet Union and splintering of the Baltic States.  

Ayn was most definitely not pro-Russia, the latest lie by leftists to sow disinformation about her.  Her writing was in fact simplistic and pedantic and poor entertainment as critics agree.  Why then is it more popular than ever?

Ayn wrote from a perspective of an absolutist ideal not because it was attainable in a world of imperfect people, but rather to paint a simple contrast between the principles of a free people whom the government must serve vs a World in which the people are servants of, and literally property of, an all-powerful State. It was necessary to write simplistically because people are so dreadfully stupid, and we see that reflected in the throngs of today’s youth gleefully and eagerly begging government to take away our “burdensome” rights.

I am a centrist, but today’s people have been so confused by propaganda that they don’t understand there is an objective definition. The news will tell you that a centrist is someone who wants to increase our deficits and taxes “just a little,” those “to the left” want to increase it a lot, those to the right want to decrease the deficit a little without changing taxes, and the RADICAL RIGHT wants to balance the budget.  These definitions are absurd and patently insane.

While complaining about growing inequality, the left always pushes for more of what cause it to grow.  Our tax system causes the real effective tax rate for a typical working couple making $100k to be over 50% of their earnings which also means over 50% of their available time, while the non working rich pay about 20% on the realized return on their investments and nothing of their time.  This is based on the definition of “tax” upheld countless times over two centuries - a tax is anything government does to take your money, cause inflation, impose additional costs on goods and services through regulations and business taxes, or places individual burdens of time and money on individuals for other sorts compliance.

Burdened with oppressive taxes, the working class must toil additional decades before achieving financial independence, if ever.  Meanwhile, the massive taxation is used to enrich the politically connected beyond any level possible without such interference. Their “solution?”  More government.

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Meredith Poor said:

I don't think for a moment that Ayn Rand was sympathetic to socialism. The point of mentioning this in the context of Brietbart, et. al. is that foreign entities, of which Russia is one, sponsor one or more actors on each side of the cultural divide in order to inflame tensions. Generally the focus is on lurid behavior, catastrophic mistakes, religious insularity, and other events that are designed to destroy trust in a nation's institutions and fellow citizens. Big problems appear when information is one sided - the stuff is convenient for those that want to hear it, the inconvenient facts are left unmentioned. 

Pravda writers and Russian operatives are amateurs compared to our domestic media.  The Russian impact on our elections, as Obama said, was and remains unmeasurably small.

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Very well said, but Russia did invade Eastern Ukraine and Crimea. They are very tricky and ran circles around Obama, as just about every other enemy did. 

China, North Korea, Russia, Iran, and Cuba are our greatest concern. They all work together well. 

We should try to convince Russia that their best interests are served by dropping their aggression and benefitting from better relations with the West. They are still trying to weaken Western Europe and advance their influence worldwide. That is what they do. A bad habit that will probably not change. The Russian people will continue to suffer under the status quo. 

Can you just imagine if President Trump tried and was successful at this very thing? Our left would go even further insane claiming it was all part of some greater “white supremacist global movement” (since SOME native Russians are “white”).

Forget it, ther is no scenario in which anything President Trump or his team could possibly do which would be possibly received positively by our left.  As others have said, if he walked on water the media would proclaim he can’t swim.

  • Like 1
  • Great Response! 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Jonathan Galt said:

I met Ayn at her final public appearance.  Her talk was prophetic, predicting the breakup of the Soviet Union and splintering of the Baltic States.  

Ayn was most definitely not pro-Russia, the latest lie by leftists to sow disinformation about her.  Her writing was in fact simplistic and pedantic and poor entertainment as critics agree.  Why then is it more popular than ever?

Ayn wrote from a perspective of an absolutist ideal not because it was attainable in a world of imperfect people, but rather to paint a simple contrast between the principles of a free people whom the government must serve vs a World in which the people are servants of, and literally property of, an all-powerful State. It was necessary to write simplistically because people are so dreadfully stupid, and we see that reflected in the throngs of today’s youth gleefully and eagerly begging government to take away our “burdensome” rights.

I am a centrist, but today’s people have been so confused by propaganda that they don’t understand there is an objective definition. The news will tell you that a centrist is someone who wants to increase our deficits and taxes “just a little,” those “to the left” want to increase it a lot, those to the right want to decrease the deficit a little without changing taxes, and the RADICAL RIGHT wants to balance the budget.  These definitions are absurd and patently insane.

While complaining about growing inequality, the left always pushes for more of what cause it to grow.  Our tax system causes the real effective tax rate for a typical working couple making $100k to be over 50% of their earnings which also means over 50% of their available time, while the non working rich pay about 20% on the realized return on their investments and nothing of their time.  This is based on the definition of “tax” upheld countless times over two centuries - a tax is anything government does to take your money, cause inflation, impose additional costs on goods and services through regulations and business taxes, or places individual burdens of time and money on individuals for other sorts compliance.

Burdened with oppressive taxes, the working class must toil additional decades before achieving financial independence, if ever.  Meanwhile, the massive taxation is used to enrich the politically connected beyond any level possible without such interference. Their “solution?”  More government.

Welcome to this site,   i like the way you write.......

Common sense....

A breath of fresh air..........

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, specinho said:

 

There are always two sides to a story............ Russia was dismantled due to false impression of invading into chechnya ......... (naomi Klein - the shock doctrine: the rise of disaster capitalism); Crimea and may be Ukraine... Chaos in Crimea was stirred up by pro-European group ...... They started it aiming to join EU ......... they ran to US Obama so that the then president could order to shell Russia on behalf of them and they could then run to EU freely............... Ever wonder why they didn't ask EU for help instead?.............. and Ukraine is the bread and butter location for Russia........... without it Russia might be crippled........

Love a movie by Morgan Freeman and Ben Affleck : The Sum of All Fear.......... There is a quote I remember vividly (roughly):" Hitler was stupid to fight Russia and America alone..........He should let them fight against each other........"

China was stirred with minority Uighur originated from Turkey; China is now having a trade war with The United States. North Korea is labelled poorly because of the closed dictatorship and its nuclear capability. But behind the scene.... they are progressing well with well dressed and highly well paved road system disclosed by documentary. 

Trump could be the first who could lead to world peace by having good relationship with Russia with his Russian origin and then China and the rest of the world. He was elected for the macho reform or state of the art "you are fired" so that "we make America Great Again".................. And then........ something changed........... He is now at a stand still with Russia; China; Arab and the middle east and everyone in the world......... except the small countries with no economic importance like us......... And a new alternative currency to USDollar is about to be announced.....................

In the game of the rich........ the poor suffer in the middle.......... When we are talking about controling the world...... what do we want to be in control of? Everything especially resources and capital or how things can be done efficiently? Well....... be prolific enough so that you can sire into the top 0.1% level of officers in every country to produce the leaders you can trust to be obedient of..... no?? Other wise if one elects puppets...... the results may vary........... human capability is just not the same........ some people born with the quality; some people born without; some people are worst that not even training could equip them with what is required............... worst are those who are not competitive enough ruining those whom they think might be able to move ahead given equal chance and leverage..........

if we have a plan......... plan thoroughly............ no? quarter way into things making all half suffer- half bemused........... no??

 

You covered many points,  most of which i agree with.

I will respond to only the point you made about how President Trump started out doing good things,  and then 'something changed, he now stands still."

That is very much true.

The reason is that President Trump is under attack by a group that we call 'the swamp". 

Also called the "deep state."

These "swamp creatures" are powerful,  and are mostly government employees,  protected from being fired in many cases.   

Many members of the "media" that we call "purveyors of fake news" are also part of "the swamp" that have attacked President Trump.

The "swamp creatures" are socialist, and pro-globalist...

They are against everything that America has historically stood for..

We are very close to a climax as to who will win this conflict.

Much of what President Trump has done to "drain the swamp" has been held up in Court.......

Those Court decisions should be resolved by the late summer of this year....

So,  please be patient while we Americans fight among ourselves.....

Democracy is not always a smooth process... 

Often it can be very messy..........

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/18/2019 at 6:55 AM, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

So glad to read and informed opinion on this forum. No better basis for uttering an opinion on Ayn Rand than if you have actually read her books. 

Even better if you actually met her.

See Jonathan Galt's post...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jonathan Galt said:

I met Ayn at her final public appearance.  Her talk was prophetic, predicting the breakup of the Soviet Union and splintering of the Baltic States.  

Ayn was most definitely not pro-Russia, the latest lie by leftists to sow disinformation about her.  Her writing was in fact simplistic and pedantic and poor entertainment as critics agree.  Why then is it more popular than ever?

Ayn wrote from a perspective of an absolutist ideal not because it was attainable in a world of imperfect people, but rather to paint a simple contrast between the principles of a free people whom the government must serve vs a World in which the people are servants of, and literally property of, an all-powerful State. It was necessary to write simplistically because people are so dreadfully stupid, and we see that reflected in the throngs of today’s youth gleefully and eagerly begging government to take away our “burdensome” rights.

I am a centrist, but today’s people have been so confused by propaganda that they don’t understand there is an objective definition. The news will tell you that a centrist is someone who wants to increase our deficits and taxes “just a little,” those “to the left” want to increase it a lot, those to the right want to decrease the deficit a little without changing taxes, and the RADICAL RIGHT wants to balance the budget.  These definitions are absurd and patently insane.

While complaining about growing inequality, the left always pushes for more of what cause it to grow.  Our tax system causes the real effective tax rate for a typical working couple making $100k to be over 50% of their earnings which also means over 50% of their available time, while the non working rich pay about 20% on the realized return on their investments and nothing of their time.  This is based on the definition of “tax” upheld countless times over two centuries - a tax is anything government does to take your money, cause inflation, impose additional costs on goods and services through regulations and business taxes, or places individual burdens of time and money on individuals for other sorts compliance.

Burdened with oppressive taxes, the working class must toil additional decades before achieving financial independence, if ever.  Meanwhile, the massive taxation is used to enrich the politically connected beyond any level possible without such interference. Their “solution?”  More government.

Thanks for your contribution to the discussion! I attended a lecture by Nathaniel Branden who was one of Ayn's proteges. He was a psychiatrist or psychologist. 

  • Great Response! 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, ronwagn said:

What you say is true but I cannot imagine why Breitbart is constantly attacked as being fake. It is a great site as is Fox News. Neither has anything whatsoever to do with Russia. Our nation's institutions have been attacked by those at the top of the Obama Administration. The FBI and the Justice Department tried to undermine and create an insurance policy against the Trump Administration while clearing the Obama Administration and the prospective Clinton Administration. That is where the duplicity is and was. The Deep State has been revealed and it is very powerful. The whole Russia Russia Russia ruse is just a smokescreen. 

Critical Information About the Trump and Hillary Investigations https://docs.google.com/document/d/1choW_wq0D5DfjRPjqLlAkfxCnnVJhRzrHeXppE6D4E8/edit

Part Two About the Obama Administration Scandals https://docs.google.com/document/d/11axnqv_b3L2k9CD6HWNMwrdIECJZSxowxjO4RIc-rbE/edit

Perfect examples of highly divisive assertions. Fox News gets shoved in my face any time I go to certain restaurants, and the stench is abominable. Sames goes for MSNBC. Much of the issue isn't simply what they report, but the specific dynamics of presentation. People are simply not conscious of the emotional manipulation going on in this material.

Russia is one actor among many. There are plenty of domestic operations that profit from turning molehills into mountains, and injecting either outright errors or highly creative interpretations of events or situations that in many circumstances wouldn't be worth reporting at all. In the meantime, other stuff that citizens might find a real source of concern are ignored because they're either 'boring' or inconvenient.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites