billvon 3,085 #101 December 21, 2009 >not very libertarian - getting something for nothing - otherwise known as mooching A system where you could mooch or not - or be mooched on or not - would be fairly libertarian. A system where the government controls who can mooch on who, and who can't, would be more authoritarian. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,566 #102 December 21, 2009 Quoteso you think mooching off unearned wealth is libertarian - odd. Why do you think it's not Libertarian?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #103 December 21, 2009 QuoteQuoteso you think mooching off unearned wealth is libertarian - odd. Why do you think it's not Libertarian? QuotePhilip Rearden The younger brother of Hank Rearden, and a Moocher. He lives in his brother's home in Philadelphia and is completely dependent on him. He believes that the source of his sustenance is evil and would love to see him destroyed. He has never had a career and spends his time perfunctorily working for various social groups. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ He becomes resentful of his brother's charity. He then requests that he be granted a job from his brother because he should not have to be burdened by the feeling of inadequacy of not earning his own livelihood. When confronted by his brother on how this job would be a mutually beneficial arrangement, Philip shrugs the argument off as irrelevant and that the job should be entitled to him solely based on his need for money and the fact of familial ties. Philip Rearden appears in sections 121 and 161. http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/characters-in-atlas-shrugged/philip-rearden.htmlstay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #104 December 21, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteso you think mooching off unearned wealth is libertarian - odd. Why do you think it's not Libertarian? QuotePhilip Rearden The younger brother of Hank Rearden, and a Moocher. He lives in his brother's home in Philadelphia and is completely dependent on him. He believes that the source of his sustenance is evil and would love to see him destroyed. He has never had a career and spends his time perfunctorily working for various social groups. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ He becomes resentful of his brother's charity. He then requests that he be granted a job from his brother because he should not have to be burdened by the feeling of inadequacy of not earning his own livelihood. When confronted by his brother on how this job would be a mutually beneficial arrangement, Philip shrugs the argument off as irrelevant and that the job should be entitled to him solely based on his need for money and the fact of familial ties. Philip Rearden appears in sections 121 and 161. http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/characters-in-atlas-shrugged/philip-rearden.html From your post, I'm guessing that you think this proves your point?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #105 December 21, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Quote so you think mooching off unearned wealth is libertarian - odd. Why do you think it's not Libertarian? Quote Philip Rearden The younger brother of Hank Rearden, and a Moocher. He lives in his brother's home in Philadelphia and is completely dependent on him. He believes that the source of his sustenance is evil and would love to see him destroyed. He has never had a career and spends his time perfunctorily working for various social groups. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ He becomes resentful of his brother's charity. He then requests that he be granted a job from his brother because he should not have to be burdened by the feeling of inadequacy of not earning his own livelihood. When confronted by his brother on how this job would be a mutually beneficial arrangement, Philip shrugs the argument off as irrelevant and that the job should be entitled to him solely based on his need for money and the fact of familial ties. Philip Rearden appears in sections 121 and 161. http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/characters-in-atlas-shrugged/philip-rearden.html From your post, I'm guessing that you think this proves your point? i wouldn't say 'proves' - but it definitely helps my point along (a long time since i read atlas shrugged as science fiction - might even re-read it as it didn't leave much of an impression on me at the time)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #106 December 21, 2009 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote so you think mooching off unearned wealth is libertarian - odd. Why do you think it's not Libertarian? Quote Philip Rearden The younger brother of Hank Rearden, and a Moocher. He lives in his brother's home in Philadelphia and is completely dependent on him. He believes that the source of his sustenance is evil and would love to see him destroyed. He has never had a career and spends his time perfunctorily working for various social groups. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ He becomes resentful of his brother's charity. He then requests that he be granted a job from his brother because he should not have to be burdened by the feeling of inadequacy of not earning his own livelihood. When confronted by his brother on how this job would be a mutually beneficial arrangement, Philip shrugs the argument off as irrelevant and that the job should be entitled to him solely based on his need for money and the fact of familial ties. Philip Rearden appears in sections 121 and 161. http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/characters-in-atlas-shrugged/philip-rearden.html From your post, I'm guessing that you think this proves your point? i wouldn't say 'proves' - but it definitely helps my point along (a long time since i read atlas shrugged as science fiction - might even re-read it as it didn't leave much of an impression on me at the time) A hint for you - just because the novel is about libertarianism doesn't mean that his character is libertarian.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #107 December 21, 2009 he's the beneficiary of unearned family wealth stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,566 #108 December 21, 2009 Quoteso you think mooching off unearned wealth is libertarian - odd. Why do you think it's not Libertarian?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #109 December 21, 2009 Quote he's the beneficiary of unearned family wealth Still doesn't make your point re: libertarianism.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #110 December 21, 2009 QuoteQuoteso you think mooching off unearned wealth is libertarian - odd. Why do you think it's not Libertarian? i thought moochers and libertarians were opposites - but obviously they're the same.stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #111 December 21, 2009 Quote Quote he's the beneficiary of unearned family wealth Still doesn't make your point re: libertarianism. my point is that unearned family wealth creates moochers - ayn rand says so stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,085 #112 December 21, 2009 >my point is that unearned family wealth creates moochers - ayn rand says so . . . And your solution is to . . . REQUIRE mooching. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #113 December 21, 2009 i take it you've conceded my limited liability mooching point bill?stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,085 #114 December 21, 2009 >i take it you've conceded my limited liability mooching point bill? "Limited liability mooching point" may replace "proven historical biblical fact" as my favorite SC expression ever. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,566 #115 December 22, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteso you think mooching off unearned wealth is libertarian - odd. Why do you think it's not Libertarian? i thought moochers and libertarians were opposites Why do you think that?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #116 December 22, 2009 Quote >i take it you've conceded my limited liability mooching point bill? "Limited liability mooching point" may replace "proven historical biblical fact" as my favorite SC expression ever. conceded then (corporations are moochers - taking the profit but none of the losses)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #117 December 22, 2009 Quote(corporations are moochers - taking the profit but none of the losses) That's EXACTLY what you're advocating for the workers, in your "karmic accounting" paradise. *IF* your statement were true, no business would ever fail and go OUT of business.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #118 December 22, 2009 Quote Quote (corporations are moochers - taking the profit but none of the losses) That's EXACTLY what you're advocating for the workers, in your "karmic accounting" paradise. *IF* your statement were true, no business would ever fail and go OUT of business. no, i'm advocating that those who earn the wealth inherit it - rather than family (as ayn rand points out) inheriting it unearned (you're talking about 'every business' - i'm talking about limited liability corporations)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,085 #119 December 22, 2009 >(corporations are moochers - taking the profit but none of the losses) Which makes them just like their employees! Shareholders have it a little rougher tho. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #120 December 22, 2009 Quote >(corporations are moochers - taking the profit but none of the losses) Which makes them just like their employees! Shareholders have it a little rougher tho. when i'm talking about limited liability corporations shareholders are the ones with limited liability (ie they take the benefits of ownership - the dividends. but none of the corporate liabilities)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #121 January 2, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteso you think mooching off unearned wealth is libertarian - odd. Why do you think it's not Libertarian? i thought moochers and libertarians were opposites Why do you think that? because ayn rand says so... QuoteRand's heroes must continually fight against the "parasites", "looters", and "moochers" of the society surrounding them.The looters are those who confiscate others' earnings "at the point of a gun" —often because they are government officials, and thus their demands are backed by the threat of force. Some looters are following the policies of the government, such as the officials who confiscate one state's seed grain to feed the starving citizens of another state; others are exploiting those policies, such as the railroad regulator who illegally sells the railroad's supplies on the side. The common factor is that both use force to take property from the people who produced or earned it, and both are ultimately destructive.The moochers are those who demand others' earnings because they claim to be needy and unable to earn themselves. Even as they beg for their help, however, they curse the people who make that help possible, because they hate the talented for having the talent they don't possess. Although the moochers seem benign at first glance, they are portrayed as more destructive than the looters—they destroy the productive through guilt and often motivate the "lawful" looting performed by governments.Looting and mooching are seen at all levels of the world Atlas Shrugged portrays, from the looting officials Dagny Taggart must work around and the mooching brother Hank Rearden struggles with, to the looting of whole industries by companies like Associated Steel and the mooching demands for foreign aid by the starving countries of Europe. http://open.salon.com/blog/susanthur/2009/03/12/oh_brother-here_we_go_again-atlas_shrugged-by_ayn_randstay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
justinb138 0 #122 January 2, 2010 Have you actually read the book? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #123 January 2, 2010 So, you're finally admitting that Phil Reardon *isn't* a Libertarian - gold star for you!Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #124 January 2, 2010 Quote So, you're finally admitting that Phil Reardon *isn't* a Libertarian - gold star for you! you're saying phil reardon is a 'family' moocher (like many other rich kids)stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Royd 0 #125 January 2, 2010 QuoteThat's stupid. All jobs are not equal, which is why all jobs are not paid the same in the first place. Has the guy who sweeps the floor in the factory had the same input into wealth creation as the engineer who designed the production process? The eye has said, to the foot......... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
