Now people are starting to see the problem. You can't give your cash to government because they will never spend it appropriately. It's either an all or nothing gambit and I'm of the opinion of giving nothing. We live in a society tied to safety nets and the principle in theory is fair enough, but you'll never rule out the corruption and in recent times, it's never been more corrupt.
I also don't have a problem with the levy. It appears that this government is hopeless at saving, so I would prefer a levy instead of going further into debt. However I disagree with the slogan of "all pulling together" If I read it correctly, a large proportion of the taxpaying public are not require to pull at all.
when you donate would you rather it go straight to the people who you think needs it? or through a third party who gets to decide who they think needs it. That is what the governement is..a third party, maybe even fourth party Most australians are pulling together and helping out physically and financially because we are a charitable nation who helps out our neighbours (generally), we dont need the pollies sticking there fingers in.
How would you know? You've never experienced it. Imagine a world where people were responsible for themselves and lived within their means? Imagine a world where profit was derived purely by the nature of virtue, honesty and integrity rather than maniupulation or corruption? Imagine a world where trade and business was the product of industry and enterprise, rather than rigged markets forced austerity? Imagine a world where every cent you earn goes in your pocket and you only spend it on what you wish to spend it on? Imagine a world where every dollar you earn will retain it's purchasing power until you spend it? Until you step inside the world I'd promote, you honestly know nothing of it other than your own immediate negative views of it. You make a snap judgement on something you have absolutely no idea of mate, simply because you view me as a negative individual and you view me as a negative individual because I resent the current status quo. I'd live in Galt's Gulch in a heartbeat my friend and I'd strongly wager many others here who are holding their tongues would join me all the same. I'm as alien to you in my ideals and thinking as anything you obviously know and the most common reaction to that is to fear or loathe it. I don't blame you for feeling as you do mate. You're still hardwired into the Matrix to envision anything other than the ideals the current system has indoctrinated you to see as negative. Classic brainwashing mate! But I assure you, if you understand the nature of objectivism and the ideals I present, you'd most likely (and grudgingly no doubt) accept it would be an absolutely beautiful world to live in. Ayn Rand herself tried to impart this ideal on Mike Wallace and he honestly didn't 'get it' either. [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ukJiBZ8_4k[/youtube] [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMTDaVpBPR0[/youtube] [youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEruXzQZhNI[/youtube] I repeat, time and again, you have me pegged all wrong mate. You honestly want to believe I'm just an angry little man wishing hateful crap on the world but I'm trying to tell you that under the ideals of objectivism that I personally live by, believe in and adhere to, I've never been more confident or happy as I have every been in my entire life. No one is suffering around me, my family has an amazing quality of life considering our situation. Don't make the irrational choice of dismissing what you don't understand, you could easily be robbing yourself of a really happy and meaningful way of life that you're yet to learn and experience. Objectivism at it's core is the projection of absolute free will as a moral virtue. Honesty and integrity derive self value through industry and effort to attain personal satisfaction and fulfillment. In as much as I don't expect you or any one of you to sacrifice yourself for my own person, nor should you expect me to do the same unto you. We derive mutal benefit as such through willing interaction born purely from FREE WILL and through this, preserve the nature of integrity and virtue of not only yourself, but the other individual. As such, the simple act of forced austerity, for any purpose or reason should be seen as immoral and ultimately, evil and this is the stance I take. This logic and rationale applies to all situations in life and not just business! I love my wife and children because I WANT to, not because I am OBLIGATED to and they wouldn't have it any other way. If I donate to charity, I do it for MY reasons, not because I should be COMPELLED to do it. Should it be any other way? If someone takes you wealth from you via any means for any purpose, what moral code and standard do they live by? What respect do they have for the effort you put in to attain that wealth? What will then be the consequences of how that wealth is in turn spent? This is why our society is where it is today and why I reject it. Far too many people seek moral solace in what they are taught to really understand the nature of what morality truly is, so when they see someone like me that presents a moral virtue which is against the doctrine of learned behaviour, it's automatically seen as negative. You need to break the shackles of society mate and see beyond what you've been indoctrinated to believe. Only then will you honestly be free in your mind and only then, will you understand who I am and where I am coming from.
ideology is a wonderful thing to keep intellectuals busy while people in the real world keep busy getting stuff done.
I'll donate involuntarily to the flood relief fund thanks to the government, but my voluntary donations will now be a little smaller next financial year. General consensus amongst work colleagues is that whilst it looks like a good idea it sets a precedent for other 'disasters' which may need financial support from the community at large such as droughts, earthquakes and fires ... all acts of god which insurance policies may not pay out on. Maybe the government should just print more money.
I'm simply trying to impart some small explaination as to why my ideology stands as it does. I get a lot of flack here at present because I don't fit the mould on established social convention, but it's difficult to explain it all to those who dismiss it rather than seek to understand it. For all intents and purposes, the ideology I live by is as practical as anything anyone else lives by. We're just used to looking at life in a polarised fashion and hence, only see one path of resolution for the mundane problems we all face. Yet the moment we take a breath and ask the question on why the world is such a screwed up place, we forget to look at the alternatives. Such is a habitual nature of human sheep.
This is where I have an issue with objectivism - it assumes that people who exercise their free will can always exercise it responsibly. If "the road to hell is paved with good intentions" then it doesn't really matter how people exercise their free will because they'll still end up buggering something up, but they're somehow being virtuous in doing that rather than just being idiots. It gives people an excuse to act all holier-than-thou because they're on a mission to achieve personal satisfaction and fulfillment through hard work and honest dealings. Whenever I meet these sort of people, they come across as sanctimonious prigs. I really can't stand the idea of having that as an ideal to aspire to. Its an important philosophy and an interesting point of view to consider, but nah, just doesn't work for me.
People are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want it to be true; or they're afraid it's true. The greatest harm can result from the best intentions. Passion rules reason, For better or for worse. There is magic in sincere forgiveness; in the forgiveness you give, but more so in the forgiveness you receive. Mind what people do, not only what they say, for deeds will betray a lie. The only sovereign you can allow to rule you is reason. Life is the future, not the past. Deserve Victory. A contradiction can not exist in reality. Not in part, nor in whole. Willfully turning aside from the truth is treason to one's self.
Actually, generally it assumes that they won't. It just teaches that its not your problem if they don't. The aspect I find most attractive about objectivism is that it is so grounded in reality.
People like Goldman Sachs, Eric Prince, Dick Cheney, Monsanto, Obama?.... Ideology is important to discuss to help people think about what is happening to them and where we are headed.
Greenspan found it real practical till it ran over him. I should say backed up and had few more goes for good luck the way he has looked the last couple of years.
For a start - context. Sound bites can say anything. From your statement of 'Like I say, I am so glad that I do not live in a world fashioned on your ideals' to say anything I want with the right context in mind. But for the record, I absolutely stand by every statement. The foundation which underlies the context of objectivism is fulfillment of self and value of self first - ie Selfishness. We have been raised and indoctrinated to believe the selfishness is evil, such is the dogma of living under a socialist ideal. This is where the statement and thus ideology falls in on itself. Socialist ideals are fine in theory if you believe that sort of thing, but in reality have very little practical meaning. Sure as hell if you follow the socialist ideals of self sacrifice in the servitude of others, people WILL take advantage of it and sure as hell, you WILL suffer for it. That's what created the nanny state we all live in and lament today. Now whilst I can respect this as a personal choice, I don't adhere to this ideology for myself. I absolutely refuse to sacrifice my own happiness in the name of doctrine, social ideals or conditioning. If I make a conscious decision of self sacrifice, I do so based purely on free will and through this, derive personal pleasure or satisfaction from the process. Again Stedlar, you need to look at the underlying context of the ideology before you can appreciate the ideal. In as much as I never expect you to make sacrifices for me, you shouldn't expect me to do the same in return. This goes against even your own moral virtue when discussing investment and furthermore, leads down the path of forced austerity. I never said Objectivism was an ideal for the layman or one who is still living by the status quo. It's a conscious decision based on your own intellectual rationale which forms a basis from what you can look at the world, conduct yourself within it and ultimately, find your own path to happiness. Without being facetious, would you care to explain to me (in all seriousness) why I should personally care about you or hanrahan or anyone else on the forum? We are bound by community and ideals for certain, but the moment I stop putting fingers to keyboard, are you honestly going to sit down and tell me you're worried about how I'm going or if I need help? The difference here mate is that I'm going to be so condescending and say to you that I care. I really don't. I state again quite simply that my own self satisfaction takes the highest precedence in my life and any endeavour I make for another stems from the personal desire or pleasure I derive from it, not from duty or obligation. It's through this process that effort becomes earned and with that, respect, honor and integrity of which the endeavor entails becomes apparent. My family knows this completely and so when I show them love and affection, the know it's because of my personal desire to do so - not obligation. When you look at it in this way, that's about as much honesty and integrity you can ever hope to have in your life. You can BET YOUR ARSE I am selfish mate! I am absolutely proud to say that the process I've gone through in recent years has lead me down this path, knowing full well the fallacy of socialist ideals and the laughable hypocracy of so called 'social' endeavours like 'investing in property to 'help' renters. I know it's a crock and you do too. It's just that only one of us has decided to be consistent in these morals and unashamed to identify with them. This absolutely leads straight back into the broader discussion here on the Mateship Tax. It's euphamistic language to dull the pain of another forced austerity measure on an already taxed public with no guarantee or a repeat or proper expenditure of the wealth. There's absolutely no chance in hell I endorse it and reserve my right as an individual to call it theft. I have absolutely no moral right to claim your wealth for my own derived purposes Stedlar and neither does the government. This goes for all people.
Obviously if someone else screws up its not your fault, but that is very, very different to it not being your problem. Saying "Go forth and achieve great things and don't worry about other people because they'll only curb your abilities and prevent you from reaching your potential" is just an eloquent way of saying "F*** you, I'm looking out for number one". I don't see how encouraging that kind of attitude is a good thing.
Like the Ayn Rand interview - gotta love the sixties with smoking presenters! Very prescient - creation of capitalists with government help - sounds like the banks - or the military industrial complex. Good thoughts in there - if only reality was an absolute. Enlightened self-interest is thin on the ground because people mistake selfish for self-interest and enlightened for obedient. I read The Fountainhead when I was about 12 and so I was corrupted early. lol
Auspm, you dehumanise people to justify your position. If they are not wise like you then they are stupid, idiots, sheeple. They should be cleansed from the gene pool. They are sub human, not valuable to you. They are nothing. Justify it all you like, explain it away in any fashion, but the words and concepts you use are the same dehumanising words that have been used to perpetrate evil throughout history. I only worry that other angry people will read your words and find justification for their evil actions in them as well.
Again, context. In fear of inducing Godwin's law, I'm not suggesting we round up the stupid people who refuse to take personal responsibility and live within the means and put them in a gas chamber. I am suggesting we stop supporting them with the wealth of those who DO take personal responsibility and live within their means and let them readjust themselves. Necessity has always been the mother of all invention and our welfare state only exists because we allow it to exist and feed it so. You're too busy demonising my character to even understand my point. I am not saying what I am saying with malicious intent Stedlar. The biggest problem with Ayn Rand's utopian capitalistic ideals and today is that it's been bastardised beyond recognition and assumed as proof definitive of it's failure. People dismiss Objectivism out of hand because a) they don't understand it in the slightest (ie you) or b) because they look at the real world today and assume that's the practical implementation of free market capitalism and thus doesn't work. I'm here to tell you that the world we live in today in absolutely no way represents free market capitalism or objectivist ideals. Until you understand, you'll continue to loathe, dismiss and demonise what you simply don't get. Do yourself a favour & at least read the book. Get an understanding of the full context of objectivism and let's discuss it rationally?
