Ayn Rand's Ugly Step Child

[MaggieMae]

yawn...

having another hallucination are we?

You've had your thread premise busted to pieces, asshole.....Just man up and admit it.

Followers of Ayn Rand almost destroyed America and the free world when they were given even an iota of power to put forth their whacky philosophical nitwittisms.

Since Randism has become popular of late, there have been many historical facts brought to light about her own radical methods that tend to show that she sure didn't practice what she preached. Ayn Rand and her groupies were hypocrites. She demanded strict loyalty to her ideology and ironically held court from her throne as if she, herself, were a dictator. Free expression wasn't allowed by Ayn.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Oh but he DID believe in the free market and was "shocked" when it couldn't take care of itself in the current crisis. His own words:

The 82-year-old Mr. Greenspan said he made "a mistake" in his hands-off regulatory philosophy, which many now blame in part for sparking the global economic troubles. He quoted something he had written in March: "Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholder's equity (myself especially) are in a state of shocked disbelief."

He conceded that he has "found a flaw" in his ideology and said he was "distressed by that." Yet Mr. Greenspan maintained that no regulator was smart enough to foresee the "once-in-a-century credit tsunami."

Greenspan Admits Errors to Hostile House Panel - WSJ.com

If I claim I can fly does that make it true?

I don't deny that if all you did was look at Greenspan's rhetoric then you might have a case for him supporting the free market, but if you were to look at the things he actually did then you, if you're being honest, have to come to the conclusion that he was not a supporter of the free market in any way.

nope. What Alan Greespan was, was a believer in a Free Market system within the system we have. Nobody can remake the sydstem we have into a wholly pure ideological system by themselves.

Alan Greenspan never had the power to do what you say he should've done in order to be a lilly white pursit like you.

btw, I doubt you would really like a 'real free market system. You complain too much as it is.

Again, you can't redefine what a free market is.

 

[MaggieMae]

sad thing is you don't get IT.


hint: the thread isn't about you.


moron

Right...This thread is about you setting a premise against someone who promoted the idea of objective reality, subsequently debunked within minutes with objective facts.

Dumbfuck.

So throw it into the lame zone. Don't you have that power now, Dooooooooood??

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

You've had your thread premise busted to pieces, asshole.....Just man up and admit it.

Followers of Ayn Rand almost destroyed America and the free world when they were given even an iota of power to put forth their whacky philosophical nitwittisms.

Since Randism has become popular of late, there have been many historical facts brought to light about her own radical methods that tend to show that she sure didn't practice what she preached. Ayn Rand and her groupies were hypocrites. She demanded strict loyalty to her ideology and ironically held court from her throne as if she, herself, were a dictator. Free expression wasn't allowed by Ayn.

These things aren't new to those of us of a certain age. Thing is, nobody much cared about her back when and really, nobody much cares about her now. if it wasn't for some of the crazed statements and policies pushed by her followers,..

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

sad thing is you don't get IT.


hint: the thread isn't about you.


moron

Right...This thread is about you setting a premise against someone who promoted the idea of objective reality, subsequently debunked within minutes with objective facts.

Dumbfuck.

So throw it into the lame zone. Don't you have that power now, Dooooooooood??

Dude's a tool. Plain and simple.

 

[MaggieMae]

I'm always curious about conservatives' dedication to Ayn Rand, who was completely amoral and had absolutely no concern for those around her, including her husband, whom she had no problem openly cheating on.

Here's part one of a 1959 interview with Mike Wallace and Ms. Rand:

edited...by moi-(DevNell>

I would imagine that most conservatives never gave crazy old Ayn a second look. The immature and lost amongst us have clung to her as that is what happens with most cult followers---they cling to a leaders every thought as if it were revelation. Poor Alan Greenspan was once lost and never found. All his major lifes work he has just about repudiated. He is what is know as an intelligent ass.

I'd love to be a fly on the wall over dinner at the Greenspan/Andrea Mitchell house.

 

[manu1959]

Greenspan also rejected free markets, despite his rhetoric, and objectivism by becoming the Federal Reserve chairman and foolishly attempting to centrally plan the economy. Keeping interest rates at 1% during the dot-com bust was not something the free market would have done, and inevitably led to the housing bubble and bust. Invoking Alan Greenspan as a true advocate of free markets is absolutely dishonest.

Greenspan is said to have noticed the issue, but nevertheless he supported little to no government regulation. His plan was not full of central power. Greenspan believed in the free market that corrects itself. He was a fool as was Rand.

but the market wasn't free and deregulated.....the government passed economic legislation under the carte and clinton administration the restricted the free market....and forced loans be given....the free market in an effort to cover these "bad" loans...created derivatives and bundeled loans together into a pandoras box of loans.....

it ended badly....

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I'm always curious about conservatives' dedication to Ayn Rand, who was completely amoral and had absolutely no concern for those around her, including her husband, whom she had no problem openly cheating on.

Here's part one of a 1959 interview with Mike Wallace and Ms. Rand:

edited...by moi-(DevNell>

I would imagine that most conservatives never gave crazy old Ayn a second look. The immature and lost amongst us have clung to her as that is what happens with most cult followers---they cling to a leaders every thought as if it were revelation. Poor Alan Greenspan was once lost and never found. All his major lifes work he has just about repudiated. He is what is know as an intelligent ass.

I'd love to be a fly on the wall over dinner at the Grenspan/Andrea Mitchell house.

I wouldn't. Just the image of them two together makes me blush.

 

[Anguille]

Ayn Rand's Ugly Step Child is to blame for the recent/current economic shit the world faced and is still facing.

Her nickname for him was The Undertaker.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Greenspan also rejected free markets, despite his rhetoric, and objectivism by becoming the Federal Reserve chairman and foolishly attempting to centrally plan the economy. Keeping interest rates at 1% during the dot-com bust was not something the free market would have done, and inevitably led to the housing bubble and bust. Invoking Alan Greenspan as a true advocate of free markets is absolutely dishonest.

Greenspan is said to have noticed the issue, but nevertheless he supported little to no government regulation. His plan was not full of central power. Greenspan believed in the free market that corrects itself. He was a fool as was Rand.

but the market wasn't free and deregulated.....the government passed economic legislation under the carte and clinton administration the restricted the free market....and forced loans be given....the free market in an effort to cover these "bad" loans...created derivatives and bundeled loans together into a pandoras box of loans.....

it ended badly....

there is N-O invisible hand.

The markets cannot regulate themselves as they are filled with people concerned with one thing and without morals and ethics. That said, the capitalist system we've had in the last hundred years has served some of us well and others not so well.

Think of the US right after the Civil War up until FDR. Wouldn't want to be an immigrant or a wage earner back then. The Robbber Barons and the banks and others made tons of money while most Americans lived lives of quiet desperation.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Ayn Rand's Ugly Step Child is to blame for the recent/current economic shit the world faced and is still facing.

Her nickname for him was The Undertaker.

Yes and it was always appropriate.

 

[MaggieMae]

Sorry the banking industry has never been deregulated. You might have a point if it had been Dev. As it is you are merely nattering away revealing a collossal level of ignorance.

It was deregulated when in 1999 when Phil Gramm pushed through what amounted to a separation of financial investment houses from true lending banks that decimated depression-era firewalls between commercial banks, investment banks, insurance companies, and securities firms and limited the authority of the SEC's historic oversight.

 

[MaggieMae]

And you're simply making up nonsense so that you don't have to admit that you're wrong about Greenspan. If you believe in the free market you do not accept a job as Federal Reserve chairman, you do not artificially manipulate interest rates, and you do not accept that stimulus spending is the way to get the market out of a recession. Thus proving that Greenspan did not believe in the free market.

Oh but he DID believe in the free market and was "shocked" when it couldn't take care of itself in the current crisis. His own words:

The 82-year-old Mr. Greenspan said he made "a mistake" in his hands-off regulatory philosophy, which many now blame in part for sparking the global economic troubles. He quoted something he had written in March: "Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholder's equity (myself especially) are in a state of shocked disbelief."

He conceded that he has "found a flaw" in his ideology and said he was "distressed by that." Yet Mr. Greenspan maintained that no regulator was smart enough to foresee the "once-in-a-century credit tsunami."

Greenspan Admits Errors to Hostile House Panel - WSJ.com

If I claim I can fly does that make it true?

I don't deny that if all you did was look at Greenspan's rhetoric then you might have a case for him supporting the free market, but if you were to look at the things he actually did then you, if you're being honest, have to come to the conclusion that he was not a supporter of the free market in any way.

I think you should read Woodward's "Maestro" on Greenspan before you draw that conclusion as your final one. With the exception of Jimmy Carter, he served every president since 1969, and there have been several tumultuous economic situations in all that time, and the free market has survived it all (so far), even this one. I haven't glanced at that book in a long time, but I do remember being struck by Greenspan telling Woodward that the president he felt best understood the economy was Bill Clinton.

 

[MaggieMae]

Followers of Ayn Rand almost destroyed America and the free world when they were given even an iota of power to put forth their whacky philosophical nitwittisms.

Since Randism has become popular of late, there have been many historical facts brought to light about her own radical methods that tend to show that she sure didn't practice what she preached. Ayn Rand and her groupies were hypocrites. She demanded strict loyalty to her ideology and ironically held court from her throne as if she, herself, were a dictator. Free expression wasn't allowed by Ayn.

These things aren't new to those of us of a certain age. Thing is, nobody much cared about her back when and really, nobody much cares about her now. if it wasn't for some of the crazed statements and policies pushed by her followers,..

Conservative intellectuals need a hero, other than Rush Limbaugh.

 

[MaggieMae]

Greenspan also rejected free markets, despite his rhetoric, and objectivism by becoming the Federal Reserve chairman and foolishly attempting to centrally plan the economy. Keeping interest rates at 1% during the dot-com bust was not something the free market would have done, and inevitably led to the housing bubble and bust. Invoking Alan Greenspan as a true advocate of free markets is absolutely dishonest.

Greenspan is said to have noticed the issue, but nevertheless he supported little to no government regulation. His plan was not full of central power. Greenspan believed in the free market that corrects itself. He was a fool as was Rand.

but the market wasn't free and deregulated.....the government passed economic legislation under the carte and clinton administration the restricted the free market....and forced loans be given....the free market in an effort to cover these "bad" loans...created derivatives and bundeled loans together into a pandoras box of loans.....

it ended badly....

Wrong. They weren't bundled together because they were "bad." Every mortgage in a bundle wasn't bad; some were good. They threw everything but the kitchen sink into one "security," not knowing which was which. And we continue to have that problem. No one can even find those loans.

 

[MaggieMae]

I would imagine that most conservatives never gave crazy old Ayn a second look. The immature and lost amongst us have clung to her as that is what happens with most cult followers---they cling to a leaders every thought as if it were revelation. Poor Alan Greenspan was once lost and never found. All his major lifes work he has just about repudiated. He is what is know as an intelligent ass.

I'd love to be a fly on the wall over dinner at the Grenspan/Andrea Mitchell house.

I wouldn't. Just the image of them two together makes me blush.

I meant the discussion... A few years ago when I used to listen to Imus in the Morning, it was always hilarious when he would have Andrea Mitchell on because he always asked her if Alan was soaking in the bathtub while she was chatting on the phone.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I'd love to be a fly on the wall over dinner at the Grenspan/Andrea Mitchell house.

I wouldn't. Just the image of them two together makes me blush.

I meant the discussion... A few years ago when I used to listen to Imus in the Morning, it was always hilarious when he would have Andrea Mitchell on because he always asked her if Alan was soaking in the bathtub while she was chatting on the phone.

IMUS usually made my skin crawl. Maybe it was the old guy acting like ... like he did. I get that same feeling when i see Mike BArnicle or Chris Matthews among others. That whole crowd of baby boomers...ugh.

 

[Tony_S]

I wouldn't. Just the image of them two together makes me blush.

I meant the discussion... A few years ago when I used to listen to Imus in the Morning, it was always hilarious when he would have Andrea Mitchell on because he always asked her if Alan was soaking in the bathtub while she was chatting on the phone.

IMUS usually made my skin crawl. Maybe it was the old guy acting like ... like he did. I get that same feeling when i see Mike BArnicle or Chris Matthews among others. That whole crowd of baby boomers...ugh.

Have you heard Stern bust on Imus? It's pretty funny...

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Oh but he DID believe in the free market and was "shocked" when it couldn't take care of itself in the current crisis. His own words:

The 82-year-old Mr. Greenspan said he made "a mistake" in his hands-off regulatory philosophy, which many now blame in part for sparking the global economic troubles. He quoted something he had written in March: "Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholder's equity (myself especially) are in a state of shocked disbelief."

He conceded that he has "found a flaw" in his ideology and said he was "distressed by that." Yet Mr. Greenspan maintained that no regulator was smart enough to foresee the "once-in-a-century credit tsunami."

Greenspan Admits Errors to Hostile House Panel - WSJ.com

If I claim I can fly does that make it true?

I don't deny that if all you did was look at Greenspan's rhetoric then you might have a case for him supporting the free market, but if you were to look at the things he actually did then you, if you're being honest, have to come to the conclusion that he was not a supporter of the free market in any way.

I think you should read Woodward's "Maestro" on Greenspan before you draw that conclusion as your final one. With the exception of Jimmy Carter, he served every president since 1969, and there have been several tumultuous economic situations in all that time, and the free market has survived it all (so far), even this one. I haven't glanced at that book in a long time, but I do remember being struck by Greenspan telling Woodward that the president he felt best understood the economy was Bill Clinton.

I can look up the things Greenspan has done easily enough on the internet, and his policies were not indicative of any support for a true free market. However, you seem to be of the opinion that we currently have a free market, which means that you, like Dev, do not have an accurate idea of what a free market really is.

 

[Tony_S]

If I claim I can fly does that make it true?

I don't deny that if all you did was look at Greenspan's rhetoric then you might have a case for him supporting the free market, but if you were to look at the things he actually did then you, if you're being honest, have to come to the conclusion that he was not a supporter of the free market in any way.

I think you should read Woodward's "Maestro" on Greenspan before you draw that conclusion as your final one. With the exception of Jimmy Carter, he served every president since 1969, and there have been several tumultuous economic situations in all that time, and the free market has survived it all (so far), even this one. I haven't glanced at that book in a long time, but I do remember being struck by Greenspan telling Woodward that the president he felt best understood the economy was Bill Clinton.

I can look up the things Greenspan has done easily enough on the internet, and his policies were not indicative of any support for a true free market. However, you seem to be of the opinion that we currently have a free market, which means that you, like Dev, do not have an accurate idea of what a free market really is.

I know we don't have a free market. We haven't had one since the emergence of city-states. However, in order for such a system to exist ( the models proposed by Rothbard and von Mises and, to a lesser extent, von Hayek), all actors in said system would have play by the rules. Given the nature of human beings, this is never going to happen. Groups of people, whether it's the state or corporations, pursue their own agendas.