Ayn Rands SS checks

[Skull Pilot]

Well since she paid money into the great Ponzi scam of SS, she should get her money back and since the ******* government basically forces everyone to go on medicare or else lose all the money they put into SS, she didn't have much of a choice did she?

 

[Modbert]

Can you post her railings against Social Security and Medicare?

You cannot be serious. I'm going to recommend you go look up Objectivism, Ayn Rand, and her belief system. Then, I want you to come back here and tell me with a straight face that she was in favor of Social Security and Medicare.

While you're at it, go to the Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights and read the article that is entitled, "Social Security is Immoral"

Here's a link:

The Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights: Social Security is Immoral

 

[daveman]

Ahhh. So collecting government benefits you paid for is just the same as murder.

Hooray! False Equivalences!

Though back in reality, that's not what I said at all. Gandhi and MLK Jr. advocated their entire lives for non-violence and civil disobedience. That umbrella doesn't involve killing those who stand in the way of gaining civil liberties. If MLK Jr. started to be like Charles Bronson in Death Wish, he would be a hypocrite for advocating non-violence while not practicing what he preaches.

Though I guess such concepts are either too complex for you to understand you wish to purposefully misconstrue my arguments because you have none of your own.

Ummm, actually, you said, "A similar example would be finding out that later in their lives, MLK Jr. and Gandhi started to mow down people who got the way of civil liberties."

So you're saying it's okay to preach non-violence, but kill those who oppose your goal?

The false equivalence is yours. You might want to spend a little more time thinking before you post something dumb. Or you could just post dumb things and then blame other people for it like you have been.

 

[daveman]

ahh, so she stopped collecting once her contribution was used up.

well, that's different. oh, wait...

Did she? How do you know?

frankly, what one hack writer did or didn't do really doesnt interest me that much. watching people bend themselves into pretzels trying to justify it is entertaining though.

You cared enough about it to make a baseless claim.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Can you post her railings against Social Security and Medicare?

You cannot be serious. I'm going to recommend you go look up Objectivism, Ayn Rand, and her belief system. Then, I want you to come back here and tell me with a straight face that she was in favor of Social Security and Medicare.

While you're at it, go to the Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights and read the article that is entitled, "Social Security is Immoral"

Here's a link:

The Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights: Social Security is Immoral

So even though the ******* government confiscated 15% of her income she is just supposed to let the ******* government keep it?

 

[Modbert]

Ummm, actually, you said, "A similar example would be finding out that later in their lives, MLK Jr. and Gandhi started to mow down people who got the way of civil liberties."

So you're saying it's okay to preach non-violence, but kill those who oppose your goal?

The false equivalence is yours. You might want to spend a little more time thinking before you post something dumb. Or you could just post dumb things and then blame other people for it like you have been.

I'm saying the exact opposite. It's not okay to preach non-violence, but kill those who oppose your goal. It's not okay to preach that the people who partake in things like Social Security and Welfare "moochers" and "parasites" while partaking it in yourself.

Compromise — AynRand Lexicon

There can be no compromise on basic principles. There can be no compromise on moral issues. There can be no compromise on matters of knowledge, of truth, of rational conviction.

You still have not addressed the original quotation I posted. All you have done is trying to frame my arguments to not be what they are intentionally while offering no arguments of your own.

 

[daveman]

Ummm, actually, you said, "A similar example would be finding out that later in their lives, MLK Jr. and Gandhi started to mow down people who got the way of civil liberties."

So you're saying it's okay to preach non-violence, but kill those who oppose your goal?

The false equivalence is yours. You might want to spend a little more time thinking before you post something dumb. Or you could just post dumb things and then blame other people for it like you have been.

I'm saying the exact opposite. It's not okay to preach non-violence, but kill those who oppose your goal. It's not okay to preach that the people who partake in things like Social Security and Welfare "moochers" and "parasites" while partaking it in yourself.

Compromise — AynRand Lexicon

There can be no compromise on basic principles. There can be no compromise on moral issues. There can be no compromise on matters of knowledge, of truth, of rational conviction.

You still have not addressed the original quotation I posted. All you have done is trying to frame my arguments to not be what they are intentionally while offering no arguments of your own.

Your refusal to acknowledge my arguments does not mean they don't exist.

But then, leftists see what they believe.

 

[daveman]

Can you post her railings against Social Security and Medicare?

You cannot be serious. I'm going to recommend you go look up Objectivism, Ayn Rand, and her belief system. Then, I want you to come back here and tell me with a straight face that she was in favor of Social Security and Medicare.

While you're at it, go to the Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights and read the article that is entitled, "Social Security is Immoral"

Here's a link:

The Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights: Social Security is Immoral

So even though the ******* government confiscated 15% of her income she is just supposed to let the ******* government keep it?

Yes, she is, according to the people who think taxes should be raised but refuse to send extra money to the government.

 

[uscitizen]

Can you post her railings against Social Security and Medicare?

You cannot be serious. I'm going to recommend you go look up Objectivism, Ayn Rand, and her belief system. Then, I want you to come back here and tell me with a straight face that she was in favor of Social Security and Medicare.

While you're at it, go to the Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights and read the article that is entitled, "Social Security is Immoral"

Here's a link:

The Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights: Social Security is Immoral

So even though the ******* government confiscated 15% of her income she is just supposed to let the ******* government keep it?

1/2 of that 15% is paid by the employer. There is no basis to say she would get that if it was not paid to the SS program.

Do people pay SS on Book sales? Did she hold down a regular job?

Tax may also be withheld from certain other income ... dividends, interest, capital gains, rent, and royalties ... exemption applies only to income tax, not to Social Security ...
http://www.irs.gov/individuals/employees/article/0,,id=130504,00.html

 

[Modbert]

So even though the ******* government confiscated 15% of her income she is just supposed to let the ******* government keep it?

So tell me, in Atlas Shrugged, did John Galt (essentially Ayn Rand) give into the system in order to get some of the riches that he lost by going a different path?

Again I have to ask, did I miss that chapter?

What is hilarious about this entire thread is all I'm doing is applying Rand's Objectivist, there are only absolutes philosophy. Like I said previously in this thread, I don't personally mind if Rand got the benefits that she paid into a system for. However, I'll repost a quote of hers I just posted:

There can be no compromise on basic principles. There can be no compromise on moral issues. There can be no compromise on matters of knowledge, of truth, of rational conviction.

By taking Social Security and Medicare, she compromised her basic principles. Up into her death, she continued to talk about the "parasites" and "moochers" while on the dole herself.

 

[Modbert]

Your refusal to acknowledge my arguments does not mean they don't exist.

But then, leftists see what they believe.

All you've done is attack me and try to frame my argument to be what it isn't. That isn't what I would call an argument.

You also still haven't addressed the quotations I've posted. Ayn's own words and philosophy mind you.

 

[Skull Pilot]

You cannot be serious. I'm going to recommend you go look up Objectivism, Ayn Rand, and her belief system. Then, I want you to come back here and tell me with a straight face that she was in favor of Social Security and Medicare.

While you're at it, go to the Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights and read the article that is entitled, "Social Security is Immoral"

Here's a link:

The Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights: Social Security is Immoral

So even though the ******* government confiscated 15% of her income she is just supposed to let the ******* government keep it?

1/2 of that 15% is paid by the employer. There is no basis to say she would get that if it was not paid to the SS program.

Do people pay SS on Book sales? Did she hold down a regular job?

There is no basis to say she wouldn't. It wouldn't cost an employer any more than it does now if SS was abolished.

If one is listed as self employed, then he pays the entire SS tab not just half. Chances are that Ayn was given a 1099 for her royalties and if so she paid the entire SS tax.

 

[MikeK]

It's a safe bet that TMN has not read any of Rand's major works.

Until she does, posting hack pieces against her just consistent with her ignorant bot style.

Having read Atlas Shrugged some years ago I believe Rand, as an eminent opponent of all things even vaguely socialist, has a moral reponsibility to express an opinion of those socialist benefits that she quietly took advantage of.

Of course it's true that having contributed to those programs via her federal income taxes entitles her to take advantage of the available benefits. But her status in relation to those programs calls for some objective commentary on their ultimate value. I would like to ask her if at this stage of her life she would have preferred to not be required to contribute to the programs but rather to be responsible for out-of-pocket payment of the cost of whatever massive medical treatments she might require.

I really would like to know her answer to that question.

 

[uscitizen]

It's a safe bet that TMN has not read any of Rand's major works.

Until she does, posting hack pieces against her just consistent with her ignorant bot style.

Having read Atlas Shrugged some years ago I believe Rand, as an eminent opponent of all things even vaguely socialist, has a moral reponsibility to express an opinion of those socialist benefits that she quietly took advantage of.

Of course it's true that having contributed to those programs via her federal income taxes entitles her to take advantage of the available benefits. But her status in relation to those programs calls for some objective commentary on their ultimate value. I would like to ask her if at this stage of her life she would have preferred to not be required to contribute to the programs but rather to be responsible for out-of-pocket payment of the cost of whatever massive medical treatments she might require.

I really would like to know her answer to that question.

Federal income taxes do not pay for SS benefits. And medicare is a seperate withholding on my paycheck.

 

[uscitizen]

So even though the ******* government confiscated 15% of her income she is just supposed to let the ******* government keep it?

1/2 of that 15% is paid by the employer. There is no basis to say she would get that if it was not paid to the SS program.

Do people pay SS on Book sales? Did she hold down a regular job?

There is no basis to say she wouldn't. It wouldn't cost an employer any more than it does now if SS was abolished.

If one is listed as self employed, then he pays the entire SS tab not just half. Chances are that Ayn was given a 1099 for her royalties and if so she paid the entire SS tax.

Her SS payment records would be interesting to see.

 

[daveman]

Your refusal to acknowledge my arguments does not mean they don't exist.

But then, leftists see what they believe.

All you've done is attack me and try to frame my argument to be what it isn't. That isn't what I would call an argument.

You also still haven't addressed the quotations I've posted. Ayn's own words and philosophy mind you.

Oh, well. Guess you win teh internets.

 

[del]

Did she? How do you know?

frankly, what one hack writer did or didn't do really doesnt interest me that much. watching people bend themselves into pretzels trying to justify it is entertaining though.

You cared enough about it to make a baseless claim.

and a baseless claim equates caring how?

 

[daveman]

frankly, what one hack writer did or didn't do really doesnt interest me that much. watching people bend themselves into pretzels trying to justify it is entertaining though.

You cared enough about it to make a baseless claim.

and a baseless claim equates caring how?

You know...clicking, typing a response you read somewhere else, clicking again...

 

[uscitizen]

Another little known factoid is that Ayn Rand was an illegal immigrant. Her vist expired and she stayed on

 

[code1211]

By that measure, all who have ever written, been written about or have tried to live by a given set of priciples are hypocrites.

I will agree with you that was a human being.

What? A similar example in this situation would be finding out that later in their lives, MLK Jr. and Gandhi started to mow down people who got the way of civil liberties.

That's a tad extreme. The standard you are using does not call for outright actions diametrically opposed to a particular philosophy but to any relationship to anything not completely in line with that philosophy.

Both of these men were creatures of politics and as such would be given to comprimises to achieve gains. MLK worked with LBJ. LBJ was a noted racist in many ways and yet advanced the goals of MLK. The same racist label can be hung on most Southern politicians of the day. Klan membership was almost required of Democrats in the South prior to 1955.

Ghandi was not a diaper wearing yokel from the outback of India. He was a well educated Lawyer who realized that a war with Britain at that time would be a loser. He chose passive resistance because that was the strategy that would defeat the British. He was fighting with the avaiable weapons that would prevail. In many cases, those weapons were the unprotected bodies of his followers.

Just as Washington could not defeat Britain in a convetional war, Ghandi could not either. Both knew it and both chose the stategy that would prevail. Also, both depended on the intervention of other powers and public opinion to drive that intervention. In the case of Washington, France's navy prevented the evacuation of Cornwallis from Yorktown. In the case of India, American newsreels, specifically those of FOX, changed the appearrance of ruling class Brits into oppressive thugs.

No amount of pretense can change the facts that MLK was dealing with the devil to accomplish his goals or that Ghandi was fighting a war albeit with passive aggressive methods.

If you have ever been in a relationship with a passive aggressive, you know that you are being attacked. If you don't know it, you've never been there.