Oddball
Unobtanium Member
It's unadulterated truth.
Deal with it.
Deal with it.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I'm one of those Ivy League Conservatives: Columbia and Vassar.
And here is a response re: self-made folks:
In most countries in the world your fate and your identity are handed to you; in America, you determine them for yourself. America is a country where you get to writh the script of your own life. Your life is like a blank sheet of paper, and you are the artist. This notion of being the architect of your own destiny is the incredibly powerful idea that is behind the worldwide appeal of America. Dinesh DSouza, born in India.
I imagine you are unaware that 97% of the millionaires in America did not inherit their money.
Wise up.
That is such naive and unadulterated bullshit.
1. Americans enjoy more economic opportunity than people in other countries.
Actually, some other advanced economies offer more opportunity than ours does. For example, recent research shows that in the Nordic countries and in the United Kingdom, children born into a lower-income family have a greater chance than those in the United States of forming a substantially higher-income family by the time they're adults.
If you are born into a middle-class family in the United States, you have a roughly even chance of moving up or down the ladder by the time you are an adult. But the story for low-income Americans is quite different; going from rags to riches in a generation is rare. Instead, if you are born poor, you are likely to stay that way. Only 35 percent of children in a family in the bottom fifth of the income scale will achieve middle-class status or better by the time they are adults; in contrast, 76 percent of children from the top fifth will be middle-class or higher as adults.
The United States is exceptional, however, in the opportunity it offers to immigrants, who tend to do comparatively well here. Their wages are much higher than what they might have earned in their home countries. And even if their pay is initially low by American standards, their children advance quite rapidly.
And here is a response re: self-made folks:
“In most countries in the world your fate and your identity are handed to you; in America, you determine them for yourself. America is a country where you get to writh the script of your own life. Your life is like a blank sheet of paper, and you are the artist. This notion of being the architect of your own destiny is the incredibly powerful idea that is behind the worldwide appeal of America.” Dinesh D’Souza, born in India.
I imagine you are unaware that 97% of the millionaires in America did not inherit their money.
Wise up.
That is such naive and unadulterated bullshit.
No, its true. There is something very American about "The American Dream" and the belief that anyone can become anything. That is deeply ingrained in the American psyche.
One of the great things about American culture is that it is perfectly fine to fail. Americans will happily give you a second, third, forth, fifth, sixth chance to succeed if you just keep trying.
However, there is more social mobility in other Western countries. There have been several studies that have confirmed this. It is easier to become rich in countries such as Sweden and Canada if you are poor than it is in America because poverty tends to be deeper here, and the ladder to climb out steeper.
1. Americans enjoy more economic opportunity than people in other countries.
Actually, some other advanced economies offer more opportunity than ours does. For example, recent research shows that in the Nordic countries and in the United Kingdom, children born into a lower-income family have a greater chance than those in the United States of forming a substantially higher-income family by the time they're adults.
If you are born into a middle-class family in the United States, you have a roughly even chance of moving up or down the ladder by the time you are an adult. But the story for low-income Americans is quite different; going from rags to riches in a generation is rare. Instead, if you are born poor, you are likely to stay that way. Only 35 percent of children in a family in the bottom fifth of the income scale will achieve middle-class status or better by the time they are adults; in contrast, 76 percent of children from the top fifth will be middle-class or higher as adults.
The United States is exceptional, however, in the opportunity it offers to immigrants, who tend to do comparatively well here. Their wages are much higher than what they might have earned in their home countries. And even if their pay is initially low by American standards, their children advance quite rapidly.
http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/93667-5-myths-about-our-land-of-opportunity.html
I was going to post this, but Neser beat me to the punch. Obviously, the article is from Slate so it surely is biased to a degree. However, that doesn't mean it's total bunk.
I realize that many people subscribe to Rand's philosophy. I personally find it to be ridiculous for the reason that was outlined in the article:
In a country where almost everyone believeswrongly, on the wholethat they are self-made, perhaps it is easier to have contempt for people who didn't make much of themselves. And Rand taps into something deeper still. The founding myth of America is that the nation was built out of nothing, using only reason and willpower. Rand applies this myth to the individual American: You made yourself. You need nobody and nothing except your reason to rise and dominate. You can be America, in one body, in one mind.
America didn't spring forth de novo and our society, from which Rand's protagonists like Roark, believe they should be allowed to operate in a completely unfettered manner was created and secured by men and women who acted in a selfless, collectivist manner. People are enabled to make their fortunes in this country, because somebody carries a rifle, or walks the beat, or puts out fire, to give them that opportunity. These people are not mere chattle for the Rand's Ubermensch to trod on as they move up Maslow's hierarchy.
On a literary note, I personally find Rand hard to read and don't think she is a good writer. Her characters are static and the themes come across with the tone and tenor of bible versus as opposed to challenging the reader to consider her point of view.
Very well put!
On a literary note ... reading Atlas Shrugged made me think of Russian propaganda paintings/drawings in the style of Socialist Realism. I think she's yet another ugly product of Soviet Totalitarianism and its poor attempt at communism. All of her philosophy came out of hatred. Actually, calling that a philosophy is being too nice - rather, it was one huge reaction.
Thanks for the link. I just read an aricle this morning in the New Yorker also comparing the two new biographies of Ayn Rand.Two biographies of Ayn Rand. - By Johann Hari - Slate Magazine
Poor Ayn .. or Alisa ... her entire life-story reduced to an article in a Slate magazine. Reduced it was very well though ... it affords us a very good glimpse into Rand's life and "philosophy" that gathered so many and such high-profile followers.Ayn Rand is one of America's great mysteries. She was an amphetamine-addicted author of sub-Dan Brown potboilers, who in her spare time wrote lavish torrents of praise for serial killers and the Bernie Madoff-style embezzlers of her day. She opposed democracy on the grounds that "the masses"—her readers—were "lice" and "parasites" who scarcely deserved to live. Yet she remains one of the most popular writers in the United States, still selling 800,000 books a year from beyond the grave. She regularly tops any list of books that Americans say have most influenced them. Since the great crash of 2008, her writing has had another Benzedrine rush, as Rush Limbaugh hails her as a prophetess. With her assertions that government is "evil" and selfishness is "the only virtue," she is the patron saint of the tea-partiers and the death panel doomsters. So how did this little Russian bomb of pure immorality in a black wig become an American icon?
And here is a response re: self-made folks:
In most countries in the world your fate and your identity are handed to you; in America, you determine them for yourself. America is a country where you get to writh the script of your own life. Your life is like a blank sheet of paper, and you are the artist. This notion of being the architect of your own destiny is the incredibly powerful idea that is behind the worldwide appeal of America. Dinesh DSouza, born in India.
I imagine you are unaware that 97% of the millionaires in America did not inherit their money.
Wise up.
That is such naive and unadulterated bullshit.
I am not concerned with where the "wealthy" got their money or how.
I am pointing out the notion that people who became wealthy did it "all on their own" is bullshit as is the assumption that currency provides the highest degree of stability in this world.
In a stable nation that might be true. As order breaks down, guns and bullets are more important than money. Rand crafted her model out of a society where other people, not motivated by money, provided that security and stability for her "supermen" to accomplish their goals.
All the architectural prowess in the world isn't going to help you when you have a loaded gun pointed at your head.
A person's superior brain power is not going to stop a bullet and the skilled elites are powerless against an angry mob.
I am not concerned with where the "wealthy" got their money or how.
I am pointing out the notion that people who became wealthy did it "all on their own" is bullshit as is the assumption that currency provides the highest degree of stability in this world.
In a stable nation that might be true. As order breaks down, guns and bullets are more important than money. Rand crafted her model out of a society where other people, not motivated by money, provided that security and stability for her "supermen" to accomplish their goals.
All the architectural prowess in the world isn't going to help you when you have a loaded gun pointed at your head.
A person's superior brain power is not going to stop a bullet and the skilled elites are powerless against an angry mob.
Trying to follow your tortuous track. Are you restricting this discussion to the specific literature of Rand, or are you applying it to the economic realities of society today?
Or is your fevered posting above some offshoot of the usual themes in your posts re: security, and your great efforts to protect others, and some quasi- PlayStation 2 view of the world.
And, to further muddy the waters, you have added the addle-brained rantings of a know-nothing who grumbled something about those who have money, not having earned it...at least I think that was her other point, right next to the point on her head.
Here is where I think we diverged: I favor Rand's work, not just as literature, nor even as a "life imitates art' tale, but because so much of what we see today in the ObamaNation is an attempt to take from the achievers and " I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you – that they’ve got a chance at success too.”
See that in Rand's work?
It's as though everyone doesn't have a chance for success in this America, even though there are over 9 million millionaire familes, very few of whom did not earn their money. And 33% more millionaires in '08 than there were in '07.
Now, if this is not the path you choose to examine, to discuss, I can get behind that.
But, as an indication of how far wrong you are going, take a look at who thanked you for a useful post. That's an 'Uh-Oh'.
I am not concerned with where the "wealthy" got their money or how.
I am pointing out the notion that people who became wealthy did it "all on their own" is bullshit as is the assumption that currency provides the highest degree of stability in this world.
In a stable nation that might be true. As order breaks down, guns and bullets are more important than money. Rand crafted her model out of a society where other people, not motivated by money, provided that security and stability for her "supermen" to accomplish their goals.
All the architectural prowess in the world isn't going to help you when you have a loaded gun pointed at your head.
A person's superior brain power is not going to stop a bullet and the skilled elites are powerless against an angry mob.
Trying to follow your tortuous track. Are you restricting this discussion to the specific literature of Rand, or are you applying it to the economic realities of society today?
Or is your fevered posting above some offshoot of the usual themes in your posts re: security, and your great efforts to protect others, and some quasi- PlayStation 2 view of the world.
And, to further muddy the waters, you have added the addle-brained rantings of a know-nothing who grumbled something about those who have money, not having earned it...at least I think that was her other point, right next to the point on her head.
Here is where I think we diverged: I favor Rand's work, not just as literature, nor even as a "life imitates art' tale, but because so much of what we see today in the ObamaNation is an attempt to take from the achievers and " I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you that theyve got a chance at success too.
See that in Rand's work?
It's as though everyone doesn't have a chance for success in this America, even though there are over 9 million millionaire familes, very few of whom did not earn their money. And 33% more millionaires in '08 than there were in '07.
Now, if this is not the path you choose to examine, to discuss, I can get behind that.
But, as an indication of how far wrong you are going, take a look at who thanked you for a useful post. That's an 'Uh-Oh'.
Everything in your posts is copied and pasted from somewhere else. The only original text includes almost excusively attacks at people with whom you are supposedly leading a 'discussion' of the subject matter.
How am I supposed to take you seriously? Plus the point of my post went waaay over your head... In the end, I didn't expect anything else.
What a conceited little bitch you are ... now that took me a little by surprise.
Trying to follow your tortuous track. Are you restricting this discussion to the specific literature of Rand, or are you applying it to the economic realities of society today?
Or is your fevered posting above some offshoot of the usual themes in your posts re: security, and your great efforts to protect others, and some quasi- PlayStation 2 view of the world.
And, to further muddy the waters, you have added the addle-brained rantings of a know-nothing who grumbled something about those who have money, not having earned it...at least I think that was her other point, right next to the point on her head.
Here is where I think we diverged: I favor Rand's work, not just as literature, nor even as a "life imitates art' tale, but because so much of what we see today in the ObamaNation is an attempt to take from the achievers and " I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you – that they’ve got a chance at success too.”
It's as though everyone doesn't have a chance for success in this America, even though there are over 9 million millionaire familes, very few of whom did not earn their money. And 33% more millionaires in '08 than there were in '07.
Now, if this is not the path you choose to examine, to discuss, I can get behind that.
But, as an indication of how far wrong you are going, take a look at who thanked you for a useful post. That's an 'Uh-Oh'.
Two biographies of Ayn Rand. - By Johann Hari - Slate Magazine
Ayn Rand is one of America's great mysteries. She was an amphetamine-addicted author of sub-Dan Brown potboilers, who in her spare time wrote lavish torrents of praise for serial killers and the Bernie Madoff-style embezzlers of her day. She opposed democracy on the grounds that "the masses"her readerswere "lice" and "parasites" who scarcely deserved to live. Yet she remains one of the most popular writers in the United States, still selling 800,000 books a year from beyond the grave. She regularly tops any list of books that Americans say have most influenced them. Since the great crash of 2008, her writing has had another Benzedrine rush, as Rush Limbaugh hails her as a prophetess. With her assertions that government is "evil" and selfishness is "the only virtue," she is the patron saint of the tea-partiers and the death panel doomsters. So how did this little Russian bomb of pure immorality in a black wig become an American icon?
Poor Ayn .. or Alisa ... her entire life-story reduced to an article in a Slate magazine. Reduced it was very well though ... it affords us a very good glimpse into Rand's life and "philosophy" that gathered so many and such high-profile followers.
Only thing I like about Ayn Rand is that she didn't like Ronald Reagan.
Only thing I like about Ayn Rand is that she didn't like Ronald Reagan.
That was a powerful & important sharing of your already known & way vapid opinion.
Bravo.
Two biographies of Ayn Rand. - By Johann Hari - Slate Magazine
Ayn Rand is one of America's great mysteries. She was an amphetamine-addicted author of sub-Dan Brown potboilers, who in her spare time wrote lavish torrents of praise for serial killers and the Bernie Madoff-style embezzlers of her day. She opposed democracy on the grounds that "the masses"—her readers—were "lice" and "parasites" who scarcely deserved to live. Yet she remains one of the most popular writers in the United States, still selling 800,000 books a year from beyond the grave. She regularly tops any list of books that Americans say have most influenced them. Since the great crash of 2008, her writing has had another Benzedrine rush, as Rush Limbaugh hails her as a prophetess. With her assertions that government is "evil" and selfishness is "the only virtue," she is the patron saint of the tea-partiers and the death panel doomsters. So how did this little Russian bomb of pure immorality in a black wig become an American icon?
Poor Ayn .. or Alisa ... her entire life-story reduced to an article in a Slate magazine. Reduced it was very well though ... it affords us a very good glimpse into Rand's life and "philosophy" that gathered so many and such high-profile followers.
Actually, I feel sorry for Rand due to the fact that she lived, first hand, in Stalinistic Russia and learned to hate everything that was used to empower the communists.
Government, people, dogma, society....
Only thing I like about Ayn Rand is that she didn't like Ronald Reagan.
That was a powerful & important sharing of your already known & way vapid opinion.
Bravo.
Why don't you go trolling someplace else. Assclown.