Obama & Atlas Shrugged

[jillian]

Pefect example of the Atlas Shrugged World

If you believe that, I'm not sure you really understand the book at all.

Why would you think it inappropriate to delay a tax on something for which workers traded salary increases and other things?

And what does it take away from the people who "produce"?

 

[CMike]

Pefect example of the Atlas Shrugged World

If you believe that, I'm not sure you really understand the book at all.

Why would you think it inappropriate to delay a tax on something for which workers traded salary increases and other things?

And what does it take away from the people who "produce"?

What about workers that are not in unions and don't have the "pull" these people do?

 

[jillian]

Pefect example of the Atlas Shrugged World

If you believe that, I'm not sure you really understand the book at all.

Why would you think it inappropriate to delay a tax on something for which workers traded salary increases and other things?

And what does it take away from the people who "produce"?

What about workers that are not in unions and don't have the "pull" these people do?

I'm pretty sure it applies to all collectively bargained for health benefits and doesn't discriminate among union groups. If you have some other indication, let me know.

And you didn't answer my question.

 

[CMike]

If you believe that, I'm not sure you really understand the book at all.

Why would you think it inappropriate to delay a tax on something for which workers traded salary increases and other things?

And what does it take away from the people who "produce"?

What about workers that are not in unions and don't have the "pull" these people do?

I'm pretty sure it applies to all collectively bargained for health benefits and doesn't discriminate among union groups. If you have some other indication, let me know.

And you didn't answer my question.

You are incorrect.

The corruption displayed in the Obama handling of the health care issue is a perfect illustration of the corruption in the book.

It shows how "special favors" are gotten because of their "pull". How people who don't have this "pull" will have to make up for those that have the "pull" (that's the answer to your question btw).

As was stated in the article, the bill is great as long as it doesn't apply to you. And it doesn't apply to you, if you have the "pull" to get it not to apply to you. If you don't, you are screwed.

Corruption!

The government shouldnt' be taxing health care benefits to begin with. Therefore, it is doing a "special favor" to those who are exempted. This is the corruption inherent in what Obama is doing.

From the article.

FOXNews.com - Democrats Hammered for 'Back-Room' Deal With Unions on Health Care


Under the deal, if it becomes law, union workers will be shielded from the 40 percent tax for five years -- until 2018. The threshold for the tax also was raised so that it will kick in for plans worth $24,000 instead of $23,000. And dental and vision coverage will not count toward that threshold.

But what about everybody else?

The unions, traditional supporters of the Democratic Party and a major factor in Obama's political infrastructure, got a deal, but Republicans said that non-union workers will still have to pay the tax from the get-go starting in 2013. related links

"I guess this bill is only good if it doesn't apply to you," GOPAC Chairman Frank Donatelli said.

"Millions of non-union workers ... would be forced to pay higher taxes for the same benefits their union counterparts" receive, Republicans on the House Ways and Means Committee said in a written statement.

The deal also leaves a $60 billion hole in the projected revenue stream, meaning Democrats will have to find the money elsewhere if they want to meet Obama's pledge to keep health care reform deficit-neutral.

"There's a $60 billion hole now in the legislation," Democratic strategist Doug Schoen said. "Not sure it's fair, not sure it's paid for."

Neither union leaders nor the White House offered any specifics on where that money would come from.

Lawmakers, though, have been considering applying Medicare payroll taxes to capital gains and other dividend incomes above $200,000 for individuals and $250,000 for families.

Critics of the legislation called the union deal another back-room favor handed out in secret talks that violated Obama's promise of transparency. They say special treatment has gone to interests ranging from the pharmaceutical industry to the state of Nebraska, which was offered extra federal funding for Medicaid patients in exchange for moderate Sen. Ben Nelson's support.


"If this bill is so good, why does everyone need an exemption in order to vote for it? ... We see the drug companies get a special deal. We see what happened in Louisiana and most notoriously Nebraska in the Senate where they got special deals. And now the unions get a special deal." Donatelli said.

"This union kickback is the latest in a long line of back-room pay-offs and sweetheart deals on a health care bill that the American people overwhelmingly do not support," Michael Steel, a spokesman for House Minority Leader John Boehner, said in an e-mail Friday.

 

[CMike]

Well, personal taste is personal taste. I had a hard time getting through Atlas Shrugged - She uses too many words to say too little. I had a better time getting through Anthem. In terms of her politics - she admitted that her politics were entirely utopian ideals, with no basis to exist in our society - and, like you said, I have no desire to live in a Randian nightmare world either.

Interestingly, I had never read it. And then I went to my high school reunion and one of my old friends asked what my favorite book was. He told me his was Atlas Shrugged, so I finally got around to it.

I think Ayn Rand's philosophy is incredibly self-indulgent and self-pitying.

Really? I think it was very prophetic of what this country is going through right now.

 

[CMike]

Another example, is when Obama was ruling GM.

The dealerships that had democrat ties, stayed open, many of the ones that didn't have this "pull" no matter their profitability were closed by Obama.

The achievers were closed down, because they didn't have the corrupt "pull," just like in Atlas Shrugged.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Another example, is when Obama was ruling GM.

The dealerships that had democrat ties, stayed open, many of the ones that didn't have this "pull" no matter their profitability were closed by Obama.

The achievers were closed down, because they didn't have the corrupt "pull," just like in Atlas Shrugged.

You know this particular talking point has been disproved already, right?

 

[jillian]

Another example, is when Obama was ruling GM.

The dealerships that had democrat ties, stayed open, many of the ones that didn't have this "pull" no matter their profitability were closed by Obama.

The achievers were closed down, because they didn't have the corrupt "pull," just like in Atlas Shrugged.

did you even read the book? seriously, because "corrupt pull" had nothing to do with it. and the majority of dealerships had republican ties.

But here, let me help you:

Nate Silver over at FiveThirtyEight.com points out, “There is just one problem with this theory. Nobody has bothered to look up data for the control group: the list of dealerships which aren't being closed. It turns out that all car dealers are, in fact, overwhelmingly more likely to donate to Republicans than to Democrats -- not just those who are having their doors closed.”

Silver crunched the numbers, and found that 88% of auto dealers identified themselves as Republicans. Doug Ross came up with 92% as the number of car dealers who donated to Republicans. Could it be that more Republican dealerships are being closed because dealers are much more likely to be Republicans?

Obviously, this couldn’t be the answer because it is logical and makes sense. Instead the right wing media would prefer to believe a conspiracy theory that has no evidence supporting it. This bit of right wing paranoia has been debunked.

http://www.politicususa.com/en/Obama-GOP-Dealerships

 

[CMike]

Furor grows over partisan car dealer closings | Washington Examiner

Furor grows over partisan car dealer closings
By: Mark Tapscott
Editorial Page Editor
05/27/09 3:37 PM EDT


Evidence appears to be mounting that the Obama administration has systematically targeted for closing Chrysler dealers who contributed to Repubicans. What started earlier this week as mainly a rumbling on the Right side of the Blogosphere has gathered some steam today with revelations that among the dealers being shut down are a GOP congressman and closing of competitors to a dealership chain partly owned by former Clinton White House chief of staff Mack McLarty.
The basic issue raised here is this: How do we account for the fact millions of dollars were contributed to GOP candidates by Chrysler who are being closed by the government, but only one has been found so far that is being closed that contributed to the Obama campaign in 2008?

Florida Rep. Vern Buchanan learned from a House colleague that his Venice, Florida, dealership is on the hit list. Buchanan also has a Nissan franchise paired with the Chrysler facility in Venice.

"It's an outrage. It's not about me. I'm going to be fine," said Buchanan, the dealership's majority owner. "You're talking over 100,000 jobs. We're supposed to be in the business of creating jobs, not killing jobs," Buchanan told News 10, a local Florida television station.

Buchanan, who succeeded former Rep. Katharine Harris in 2006, reportedly learned of his dealership's termination from Rep.Candace Miller, R-MI. Buchanan owns a total of 23 dealerships in Florida and North Carolina.

Also fueling the controversy is the fact the RLJ-McCarty-Landers chain of Arkansas and Missouri dealerships aren't being closed, but many of their local competitors are being eliminated. Go here for a detailed look at this situation. McClarty is the former Clinton senior aide. The "J" is Robert Johnson, founder of the Black Entertainment Television, a heavy Democratic contributor.

A lawyer representing a group of Chrysler dealers who are on the hit list deposed senior Chrysler executives and later told Reuters that he believes the closings have been forced on the company by the White House.

"It became clear to us that Chrysler does not see the wisdom of terminating 25 percent of its dealers. It really wasn't Chrysler's decision. They are under enormous pressure from the President's automotive task force," said attorney Leonard Bellavia.

RedState.com's Josh Painter has a useful roundup of what has been found so far by a growing number of bloggers digging into what could be a very big story indeed. Also, see my column on this issue and how it fits into the larger context dubbed by the Examiner's Michael Barone as "gangster government."

As part of Chrysler's bankruptcy agreement with the White House, the company plans to close roughly a quarter of its 3,200 dealerships. Lists of the dealerships being cut and those retaining their Chrysler franchises can be found here in pdf format. Many dealers contend the criteria being used to determine which dealerships survive is not clear and that many of those that are being closed in fact are profitable businesses, despite the current recession.



Read more at the Washington Examiner: Furor grows over partisan car dealer closings | Washington Examiner

 

[jillian]

Furor grows over partisan car dealer closings | Washington Examiner

read my link. it specifically talks about the examiner article.

and nate silver pointed out that YES the ones that were closed were more repub than dem...

BUT SO WERE THE ONES THAT WERE LEFT OPEN.

But the Examiner was too stupid to examine that variable.

You need to go back and read.

 

[CMike]

The White House looters

White House puts UAW ahead of property rights | Washington Examiner

White House puts UAW ahead of property rights
By: Michael Barone
Senior Political Analyst
May 6, 2009

But my sadness turned to anger later when I heard what bankruptcy lawyer Tom Lauria said on a WJR talk show that morning. “One of my clients,” Lauria told host Frank Beckmann, “was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under threat that the full force of the White House press corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight.”

Lauria represented one of the bondholder firms, Perella Weinberg, which initially rejected the Obama deal that would give the bondholders about 33 cents on the dollar for their secured debts while giving the United Auto Workers retirees about 50 cents on the dollar for their unsecured debts.

This of course is a violation of one of the basic principles of bankruptcy law, which is that secured creditors — those who lended money only on the contractual promise that if the debt was unpaid they’d get specific property back — get paid off in full before unsecured creditors get anything. Perella Weinberg withdrew its objection to the settlement, but other bondholders did not, which triggered the bankruptcy filing.

After that came a denunciation of the objecting bondholders as “speculators” by Barack Obama in his news conference last Thursday. And then death threats to bondholders from parties unknown.

The White House denied that it strong-armed Perella Weinberg. The firm issued a statement saying it decided to accept the settlement, but it pointedly did not deny that it had been threatened by the White House. Which is to say, the threat worked.

The same goes for big banks that have received billions in government Troubled Asset Relief Program money. Many of them want to give back the money, but the government won’t let them. They also voted to accept the Chrysler settlement. Nice little bank ya got there, wouldn’t want anything to happen to it.

Left-wing bloggers have been saying that the White House’s denial of making threats should be taken at face value and that Lauria’s statement is not evidence to the contrary. But that’s ridiculous. Lauria is a reputable lawyer and a contributor to Democratic candidates. He has no motive to lie. The White House does.

Think carefully about what’s happening here. The White House, presumably car czar Steven Rattner and deputy Ron Bloom, is seeking to transfer the property of one group of people to another group that is politically favored. In the process, it is setting aside basic property rights in favor of rewarding the United Auto Workers for the support the union has given the Democratic Party. The only possible limit on the White House’s power is the bankruptcy judge, who might not go along.

Michigan politicians of both parties joined Obama in denouncing the holdout bondholders. They point to the sad plight of UAW retirees not getting full payment of the health care benefits the union negotiated with Chrysler. But the plight of the beneficiaries of the pension funds represented by the bondholders is sad too. Ordinarily you would expect these claims to be weighed and determined by the rule of law. But not apparently in this administration.

Obama’s attitude toward the rule of law is apparent in the words he used to describe what he is looking for in a nominee to replace Justice David Souter. He wants “someone who understands justice is not just about some abstract legal theory,” he said, but someone who has “empathy.” In other words, judges should decide cases so that the right people win, not according to the rule of law.

 

[Modbert]

CMike has just decided to fly in the face of all logic and rhetoric and just keep posting the same conspiracy bullshit.

And Rand is a overrated writer and can be considered a textbook definition of batshit insane.

 

[CMike]

Another example, is when Obama was ruling GM.

The dealerships that had democrat ties, stayed open, many of the ones that didn't have this "pull" no matter their profitability were closed by Obama.

The achievers were closed down, because they didn't have the corrupt "pull," just like in Atlas Shrugged.

did you even read the book? seriously, because "corrupt pull" had nothing to do with it. and the majority of dealerships had republican ties.

But here, let me help you:

Nate Silver over at FiveThirtyEight.com points out, “There is just one problem with this theory. Nobody has bothered to look up data for the control group: the list of dealerships which aren't being closed. It turns out that all car dealers are, in fact, overwhelmingly more likely to donate to Republicans than to Democrats -- not just those who are having their doors closed.”

Silver crunched the numbers, and found that 88% of auto dealers identified themselves as Republicans. Doug Ross came up with 92% as the number of car dealers who donated to Republicans. Could it be that more Republican dealerships are being closed because dealers are much more likely to be Republicans?

Obviously, this couldn’t be the answer because it is logical and makes sense. Instead the right wing media would prefer to believe a conspiracy theory that has no evidence supporting it. This bit of right wing paranoia has been debunked.

Debunking the Obama is Closing GOP Car Dealerships Conspiracy Theory | Politicususa.com

I read it before, but I am rereading it now.

Dagny just came back after hearing about the worst national railroad disaster just occurred.

There was a Washington, D.C. crony on a Taggert train, the Comet. The train got stuck in a long tunnel.

Due to the terrrible state of the economy because of the looting from the government, the the trains and tracks were in terrible shape.

In any case they needed a diesel train to get the train out of the tunnel. However, none would be available until the next day. This D.C. schmuck sent a telegraph to the president of the railroad, Jim Taggert, threatening him that if he doesn't get the train out right now there is going to be hell to pay.

Jim then told the acting VP of operations to get the train out now, which is impossible because there isn't a diesel available at this time. There are only coal burning trains, and the fumes make it unbearable in the tunnel.

In any case the activing VP sent a telegraph to the station manager saying you better send a train to get him out right now, and then dissapeared. The station manager then tried to call the VP and ask him how, but the VP was gone, because he didn't want the responsibility.

The station manager then decided that if he didn't obey the directive he would be brought before the unification board and get fired. Aside from the unification board, it is now illegal to fire anyone, quit a job, produce less than you produced before, and all patents and copyrights now belong to the government.

In any case, the station manager knowing that he is going to cause the death of all the passengers sent a coal burning train into the tunnel. The fumes became overhwhelming and passengers pressed the emergency break. The train then had a break down and both trains were now stuck.

An army train filled with explosives not knowing that the trains were there, was going full speed ahead into the tunnel, crashed, and there was a tremendous explosion.

Francisco was trying to recruit Dagny (the heroine) to get away from the looters, when they heard about this on the radio. Despite Franciso, or Frisco's protests, Dagny raced back to HQ.

The DC cronies then called her when she got there, and told her that for now she can do what wants.

Oh yeah, and Ragner offered Hank Rearden a block of gold for partial payment of what the looters took from him.

So NO I know NOTHING about the book.

And yeah the book was about government corruption and its looting of the achievers.

 

[CMike]

Furor grows over partisan car dealer closings | Washington Examiner

read my link. it specifically talks about the examiner article.

and nate silver pointed out that YES the ones that were closed were more repub than dem...

BUT SO WERE THE ONES THAT WERE LEFT OPEN.

But the Examiner was too stupid to examine that variable.

You need to go back and read.

May I see the link to the statistical analysis that said 92% of car dealers donate to republicans please?

 

[Modbert]

Nathaniel Branden - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In 1950, after having become a fan of Ayn Rand's novels and exchanging letters and phone calls with her, the 19-year-old Branden met Rand. The pair went on to develop an eighteen-year personal and professional relationship. Eventually, Rand and the much younger Branden had a romantic affair. While both were married to other people at the time, both of their respective spouses consented to the affair before it started. According to Barbara Branden, however, "the affair was agonizingly painful," both to her and Rand's husband.[8]

For many years Branden was considered to be a leading figure in the Objectivist movement; indeed, many perceived him as being second only to Rand herself. He was the leader of a group of Rand's closest associates known as The Collective, which also included his wife Barbara Branden, Leonard Peikoff and Alan Greenspan. At the time, Rand considered him to be a soul mate of hers and designated him her "intellectual heir

Tom McMahon: Objectivism: The Unlikeliest Cult In History

Branden recalled: "There were implicit premises in our world to which everyone in our circle subscribed, and which we transmitted to our students at NBI." Incredibly, and here is where the philosophical movement became a cult, they came to believe that (pp. 255-256):

Ayn Rand is the greatest human being who has ever lived.
Atlas Shrugged is the greatest human achievement in the history of the world.
Ayn Rand, by virtue of her philosophical genius, is the supreme arbiter in any issue pertaining to what is rational, moral, or appropriate to man's life on earth.
Once one is acquainted with Ayn Rand and/or her work, the measure of one's virtue is intrinsically tied to the position one takes regarding her and/or it.
No one can be a good Objectivist who does not admire what Ayn Rand admires and condemn what Ayn Rand condemns.
No one can be a fully consistent individualist who disagrees with Ayn Rand on any fundamental issue.
Since Ayn Rand has designated Nathaniel Branden as her "intellectual heir," and has repeatedly proclaimed him to be an ideal exponent of her philosophy, he is to be accorded only marginally less reverence than Ayn Rand herself.
But it is best not to say most of these things explicitly (excepting, perhaps, the first two items). One must always maintain that one arrives at one's beliefs solely by reason.

The Sociology of the Ayn Rand Cult by Murray N. Rothbard

The philosophical rationale for keeping Rand cultists in blissful ignorance was the Randian theory of "not giving your sanction to the Enemy." Reading the Enemy (which, with a few carefully selected exceptions, meant all non- or anti-Randians) meant "giving him your moral sanction," which was strictly forbidden as irrational. In a few selected cases, limited exceptions were made for leading cult members who could prove that they had to read certain Enemy works in order to refute them. This book-banning reached its apogee after the titanic Rand-Branden split in late 1968, a split which was the moral equivalent in miniature of, say, a split between Marx and Lenin, or between Jesus and St. Paul. In a development eerily reminiscent of the organized hatred directed against the arch-heretic Emanuel Goldstein in Orwell’s 1984, Rand cultists were required to sign a loyalty oath to Rand; essential to the loyalty oath was a declaration that the signer would henceforth never read any future works of the apostate and arch-heretic Branden. After the split, any Rand cultist seen carrying a book or writing by Branden was promptly excommunicated. Close relatives of Branden were expected to – and did – break with him completely.

How's following that glorified cult there Mike?

 

[CMike]

Oh yeah also Hank Rearden is having an affair with Dagny.

And Hank's ***** wife Lillian revealed that information to Jim Taggert, who then told Wesley Mouch in exchange for higher train rates for Taggert.

That information was then used as blackmail against Hank Rearden to give over the patent to Rearden metal. Dr. Ferris promised to expose Dagny. Rearden agreed to protect her reputation.

However, anyone who builds a furnace used to make Rearden metal other than Rearden, gets his furnaces destroyed. Serves the looters right. Don't you agree?

 

[Father Time]

In "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand, the government has decided to take from the achievers, the people who have and demonstrated the ability to achieve and make things happen.

They are being looted by those who don't have that the abiliy as these achievers.

The looters' (i.e. those that get the government influence) ability is to make laws to take from these people.

Society has changed from a society based on production and profit to a society based on pull and getting favors from people who are good at making profit. As a result of these various laws to benefit these select few, the economy goes into turmoil)

How much do you think Obama is changing America to become like this type of society in Atlas Shrugged?

I've got to get that book.

Read "Anthem" by her instead. It makes the same point, in about 900 less pages.

Atlas Shrugged is one of the most overrated books I've ever read - and not because of it's politics - I know where I stand with Ayn Rand. It's just a poorly written 1000 page monstrosity that's thesis can be summed up in one sentence.

Do you think you could play Bioshock instead of reading the book to get the same info or not?

 

[Modbert]

Oh yeah also Hank Rearden is having an affair with Dagny.

And Hank's ***** wife Lillian revealed that information to Jim Taggert, who then told Wesley Mouch in exchange for higher train rates for Taggert.

That information was then used as blackmail against Hank Rearden to give over the patent to Rearden metal. Dr. Ferris promised to expose Dagny. Rearden agreed to protect her reputation.

However, anyone who builds a furnace used to make Rearden metal other than Rearden, gets his furnaces destroyed. Serves the looters right. Don't you agree?

We get it, you found a nice Rand site or wikipedia.

 

[Father Time]

...

How much do you think Obama is changing America to become like this type of society in Atlas Shrugged?

Quite a bit. But to be fair, this has been going on for decades. Each year we lose a little bit more economic freedom. And the wealthy and corporations are already 'shrugging' by sending their operations and wealth off-shore.

While simultaneously drowning DC in lobbyists to get favors.

 

[CMike]

Jillian did you read the book? Based on your comments I have my doubts.

What kind of business did Francisco have?