|
Replies: 97
| visibility 1
|
Orange Blooded [3350]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 7782
Joined: 11/6/03
|
Atlas Shrugged Part I was awesome
Apr 17, 2011, 3:33 PM
|
|
Too bad it's being censored in most of the heartland where most of those who "get it" live.
|
|
|
|
 |
110%er [5711]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3353
Joined: 9/1/03
|
Re: Atlas Shrugged Part I was awesome
Apr 17, 2011, 3:37 PM
|
|
Good to hear, I hope to see it next weekend. Due to content I know they may have had a hard time getting good actors, was the acting good?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1367]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1358
Joined: 8/18/02
|
Dagny was hot***
Apr 17, 2011, 4:09 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
not due to content, due to the owner of the movie rights...
Apr 17, 2011, 4:50 PM
[ in reply to Re: Atlas Shrugged Part I was awesome ] |
|
not spending a lot on the movie. His rights to the material were about to expire, and he had to make something spur of the moment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3350]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 7782
Joined: 11/6/03
|
Yeah, was sufficient. Like you said, I'm sure the Hollywood
Apr 17, 2011, 9:13 PM
[ in reply to Re: Atlas Shrugged Part I was awesome ] |
|
norms weren't standing in line for this one, but I thought they fit the parts well. It's neat to see them pull the storyline into the modern era with computers, smartphones, high-speed rail etc. Can't wait for part II.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38925]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22731
Joined: 3/17/11
|
I'm saving my movie money for
Apr 17, 2011, 3:44 PM
|
|
the 5th Quarter.
But I'll be sure to catch it on DVD later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
awesomely nerdy and silly, I'm sure***
Apr 17, 2011, 4:49 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1483]
TigerPulse: 95%
Posts: 2194
Joined: 3/15/03
|
Lounge must be closed.....#### chat regulations***
Apr 17, 2011, 6:21 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1535]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 1370
Joined: 6/3/06
|
I'm gonna say you're the only person in America who thought
Apr 17, 2011, 9:28 PM
|
|
it was any good...at all. Oh--and maybe Glenn Beck liked it, but that's it. And it's not being censored, but if it won't make any money, why would any theater waste the screens on it.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/atlas_shrugged_part_i/#!reviews=top_critics
Glad YOU enjoyed it though. Have fun slogging through parts two and three, assuming they ever get made.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1959]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1650
Joined: 1/8/01
|
Only person in America eh?
Apr 17, 2011, 9:42 PM
|
|
Your own link shows that indeed the professional critics did not like the movie, yet the audience overwhelmingly thought it was superb. It's funny how the leftist media will slant anything as they see fit. I know a professed liberal who saw the movie and now says he understands the concept of limited government better now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
A very biased view of limited government****
Apr 17, 2011, 10:25 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1535]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 1370
Joined: 6/3/06
|
You really think there was anybody there who hadn't
Apr 17, 2011, 11:24 PM
[ in reply to Only person in America eh? ] |
|
already decided that they were going to like it, no matter what? C'mon--NOBODY'S going to that movie unless they are bent that way politcally. Be honest enough to admit that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Liberals base everything on emotional arguments that can NOT
Apr 18, 2011, 6:08 PM
|
|
be supported by the facts!
Nothing the government does is done with efficiency or effectiveness. Government by nature is inefficient and slow because it is a bureaucracy.
Look at public schools vs. private Catholic schools, which provide far better educations, in better facilities, for less money. There are other private school models that work better as well. We need a voucher system.
Why is the Federal government involved in education anyway? They weren't until Carter started the Department of Education in 1979. Before that, education was 100% local. Since the Dept of Edu was started, teach unions have gained control of the system and co-opted and corrupted education in America and the standards have been falling ever since!
The Dept of Edu, Dept of Interior, and a few others cabinets of the executive branch are huge expensive bureaucracies that do nothing but waste money and inhibit the efficiency of the local entities they are suppose to support.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
I agree with your first part
Apr 18, 2011, 6:12 PM
|
|
but you're wrong as to why. The government only does things that are inherently inefficient schools, welfare, roads, military, etc. There is no profit incentive in any of those cases. So you're right they are inefficient, but that's because they are tasks the private sector can't handle.
And secondly, vouchers are a complete failure. Every school district that has tried them has failed. Even the conservatives who promoted the ideas in the 50s have denounced them as failures.
Catholic schools only perform better because they have a better student body. You could put the richest kids in in NYC in Brandies Public HS and they would still go on to attend ivy league schools.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Wrong!! Education could easily be privatized. There are
Apr 18, 2011, 6:25 PM
|
|
several successful models. The makers of "Waiting for Superman" were radical liberals and even they now conclude education using privatized models would be superior and make ANY 1st grader a college graduate regardless of socio-economics.
Teacher unions & the Dept. of Edu are largely responsible for the decline of education in America. Before 1979, schools were run locally, county by county. Education could easily be privatized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Show me evidence that vouches work
Apr 18, 2011, 6:27 PM
|
|
but you can't, so it's just easier for you to just say "wrong"
I'm not even a Democrat and it's frustrating listening to your argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
The reason many voucher systems fail is two fold .....
Apr 18, 2011, 6:40 PM
|
|
1. The entire county or state isn't run that way, creating conflicts and flaws in the system. And the vouchers can only be used at public schools. It's NOT a true voucher system like there should be, it's a hybrid.
2. The schools are still being run by a government bureaucracy like public schools, not private schools. One of the biggest differences in private school success is they have discipline, whereas the public schools are run by the inmates and have been since the early 80s. And there is still the influence by the national teachers union.
A TRUE voucher system, where the vouchers could be used to go to ANY public OR private school, would make a huge difference.
But beyond that, the biggest, fastest, best change would be to privatize schools. It would have two immediate positive impacts ... It would get rid of the influence of the teacher unions and allow schools to restore discipline.
The ONLY reason I'm for a voucher system is, if you cut county taxes and let the average family spend those dollars as they desire, they'd #### away the money and not have it to pay for their kids school tuition. Privatize education, use a REAL voucher system without wasteful public schools & government influence, and within years your county taxes would be slashed and kids would be getting better educations.
We also need to stop pushing EVERY kid towards college and go back to spotting kids that are better suited for a trade and teaching trades and job skills!
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
You're just making things up now
Apr 18, 2011, 6:57 PM
|
|
that isn't the case at all with how vouchers were run in Milwaukee. In Milwaukee they let the kid attend any school they wanted, but eventually they tested the kids who went to pure private schools.
Those kids tested at the same level as their peers who remained in public schools.
But don't let facts get in the way of your sensationalized argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
That's only one example, but hey, don't let the REAL facts
Apr 18, 2011, 7:12 PM
|
|
get in YOUR way!!
Many voucher systems have worked. AS have privatized systems. And liberals are 100% wrong thinking it's simply a money issue. Money is NOT the problem, but how the moey is spent. But then, liberals think the solution to every problem is more money & more government intervention. Those are the problem, not the solution!
Additionally, it's NOT 100% the schools responsibility to educate! There are 3 parts to the equation: school/government, the parents, & the kid!
No kid learns unless he wants to or if forced to have good grades by their parents.
Simply throwing inner city kids into private school with public money won't work. Those kids come from homes where the parents don't pay taxes. When parents know they are paying the bill they set higher expectations and demand more!
There are reason southern state and inner city schools have lower number. In fact, if you rank the states by percentage of blacks, highest to lowest, then rank the states by education rank, lowest to highest, the correlation is almst 100%!
The left has brought PC-nes in America to the extreme and folks now say it's a "socio-economic" problem, but go anywhere in America and eliminate one factor from schools and the numbers flip dramatically!!
But as long as teachers unions and federal bureaucracies are involved, All schools will suffer!
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
You haven't presented a single fact in your argument
Apr 18, 2011, 7:38 PM
|
|
because we both know Vouchers only work in theory.
Somehow you're kind of right on the socioeconomic issue, we have to solve our poverty issues before we can expect our education system to run properly.
I agree we need a system where kids of lower IQs are funneled into programs that teach them life skills instead of calculus. But I have a feeling you would go crazy when it turns to be your kid sent to a "special" school.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
We do not have a poverty issue. No one in America lives in
Apr 18, 2011, 8:02 PM
|
|
poverty based on how poverty is defined outside America. Our "poverty" stricken have color TVs, cable, cell phones, cars, etc. THAT is NOT poverty!
Poverty BY our standard has increased exponentially since the New Deal and the advent of modern social welfare programs.
Blacks in this country will live in poverty as long as they vote as a monolithic group to support the Dems, who buy their votes with welfare programs. As long as blacks vote for the Dems and perpetuate social welfare and "hand outs" rather than "hand ups", as long as blacks turn to racists like Farakhan, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Charlie Rangle for leadership, as long as blacks look to the NAACP, as long as blacks see sports or entertainment as the only acceptable forms of entertainment while calling successful blacks in business "Uncle Toms" ..... as long as blacks cling to racism as a crutch ..... as long as blacks do these things and others they will remain in poverty!
Additionally, what a classy comment and lame personal attack at the end. And I already gave you the reasons, among others, most voucher programs fail. Education needs to be privatized. Education is a local issue, not national. The Federal government should ONLY do things that are national or international concerns! Period!
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
I'm done with you. Your blatant racism and inability to use
Apr 18, 2011, 8:05 PM
|
|
factual arguments show how uniformed you are.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Facts are not racist. And as long as any common sense
Apr 18, 2011, 8:24 PM
|
|
talks are prevented and called racists, then the problems will never be solved.
Tim Scott and Allen West are black Republicans in the US House of Representatives and they say the same things I wrote. Are they racists too?
Narrow minds see racism. People looking to blame others see racism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
It's not common sense
Apr 18, 2011, 9:04 PM
|
|
when you're arguing blacks should vote against their self interest.
And its also is racist when you argue the South ranks behind in education because they have more blacks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Becoming dependent on welfare for generation
Apr 18, 2011, 10:05 PM
|
|
after generation is in ones self interest?
Go list every state based on education. Then next to that list every state based on percentage of blacks. Then compare the two columns. They are almost identical. You think that is a coincidence?
Successful blacks that are not shills for the Democrats, the NAACP, and other special interests have been saying for decades that blacks do not value education like they need to if they are ever going to rise above poverty.
The black illegitimacy rate is over 72%. Most black children are raised by single moms or grandparents. This is not anyone's fault but blacks, and it directly leads to most of their socio-economic problems, including lack of education, prison, poverty, etc. And contrary to what YOU want to believe, some in the black community know it is their problem and do not point the finger at others!
http://www.thinkinghousewife.com/wp/2010/04/the-lesson-of-black-illegitimacy-and-fatherlessness/
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
It's better than the opposite
Apr 18, 2011, 10:09 PM
|
|
what have republicans done for minorities in the last 60 years?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Wow! Let's see, one party wants to keep blacks down by
Apr 18, 2011, 10:37 PM
|
|
buying their vote and keeping them down by creating welfare programs that they know are traps, but they look like they care, so they keep getting those votes.
The other party wants to help blacks become a part of the real American dream and doesn't do things to hold them down.
Sadly 98% of blacks blindly follow the corrupt black leaders that collude with the political party holding them down with failed programs and use racism as a tool and do everything they can to perpetuate it.
The other 2% think for themselves and see the reality of the situation. Among these blacks, who get called "Uncle Tom" for their success at rising above, are Tim Scott, Allen West, Herman Cain, Larry Elder, Alan Keyes, Ken Hamblin, and many others. Watch Fox or CNBC and you'll see a lot more blacks than you might imagine! The Republicans have several blacks that would be 100 times better as President as Obama!
The rapper "50 Cent" supported George Bush in 2005.
Bush had more blacks in very high & key positions than Clinton & Obama combined. In fact, 2 of the top 3 positions under Bush were blacks - Rice & Powell.
Do your homework and stop listening to the mainstream media.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
That doesn't make any sense
Apr 18, 2011, 10:42 PM
|
|
why would the Democrat want blacks to be poor? They already have a funding issue, why wouldn't they want their political base to be able to contribute more to campaigns?
And why would Republicans want blacks to be richer? That would involve the average republican losing money.
Just doesn't make sense
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
You really are stupid aren't you? The Dems for years
Apr 18, 2011, 11:12 PM
|
|
have had more money than the Repubs. They have outspent them the last few election cycles and Obama is going to spend over a billion in 2012. The Dems in Congress have a higher net worth than the Repubs.
By voting for welfare programs they buy the black vote. And welfare programs hold blacks back. They are a complete failure. The poverty rate among blacks skyrocketed under The Great Society. Welfare programs, like long term unemployment payments, are a trap!
Think about it, the Republican Party is the party of Lincoln, of emancipation. Yet blacks vote 98% Democrat. Why is that? Gee, maybe welfare and give away programs?
And rich folks don't lose money if poor folks get rich. Are you that clueless? Have you ever taken an econ class? Money is NOT a zero sum game. Rich people, esp corporations & small business owners, most of which are Republicans, want folks to have money to buy and spend with!! If more people have money, that's more people to buy and consume goods.
I'm done debating with you. Only a liberal could be so stupid and clueless about basic economics! And only a liberal would make a stupid comment like I don't want folks succeeding. That's just dumber than dumb! Conservatives want everyone to be successful. It would eliminate the need for welfare & give away programs and be the death of the Democrats and big goveernment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
The problem is you don't really know what you're talking
Apr 18, 2011, 11:20 PM
|
|
you just keep saying random stuff and somehow piecing it together in your head that it makes sense.
It's truly amazing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Seriously? You think I'm writing random dreamed up stuff?
Apr 18, 2011, 11:27 PM
|
|
You need to get your news from some where besides MSNBC or the New York Times. Maybe read something besides the Village Voice or Free Times.
Go look up any of my stats or the people I've mentioned. Do some online research. Educate yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recruit [97]
TigerPulse: 47%
Posts: 83
Joined: 2/14/01
|
Re: The problem is you don't really know what you're talking
Apr 19, 2011, 12:03 PM
[ in reply to The problem is you don't really know what you're talking ] |
|
> you just keep saying random stuff and somehow piecing
> it together in your head that it makes sense.
>
> It's truly amazing.
I have been following this "debate" and I must say Blue Caddy is not the one whose is detached from reality. You are. He has made his case. Yours is empty because the "facts" you have used to make your arguments are false.
One example is the idea the Republicans don't want blacks successful because that would "take money from them(Republicans)". This idea reveals your utter ignorance of how free enterprise works. You see things in a zero sum game sense, failing to realize that hard-working, productive, and successful people helps ALL in society.
Think of the Edison, Ford, etc. who SERVED their fellow man and were justifiably REWARDED for their efforts. BOTH sides of the transaction benefited, don't you think? The masses enjoyed the blessings of electricity and light as well as an affordable autombile. Win-win.
The nanny state DESTROYS wealth and DESTROYS people. The facts are overwhelming. Go read Walter Williams or Henry Hazlitt to learn how free enterprise works. You are bad enough as the resident gamecock pest. You are even worse as a liberal know-nothing.
By the way, did I tell you Blue Caddy wiped the floor with you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Best way to silence liberals is to have them watch Youtube
Apr 18, 2011, 5:58 PM
[ in reply to Only person in America eh? ] |
|
and see Milton Friedman school and silence Phil Donahue!!
Milton Friedman was a genius and would eat Obama's lunch if he were still alive!!
Dems, liberals, and the left would even reject Robert F. Kennedy & Gary Hart today. If you listen to things they said you'd swear they were Republican's or Libertarians! And Gary Hart was in the 80s. That's how quickly the far left has assumed control of the media, minus the Wall Street Journal, CNBC, Fox, and a few other papers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3350]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 7782
Joined: 11/6/03
|
Well everyone around me in the theater that I was in stood
Apr 17, 2011, 9:45 PM
[ in reply to I'm gonna say you're the only person in America who thought ] |
|
up and applauded at the end, so don't believe the hype. It's not going to get rave reviews I can promise you, but I suggest you go see for yourself.
It's so refreshing to see a film where the people who conduct business and provide investment capital and jobs aren't portrayed as villains. I regret that this film is being associated with tea party or any other political group because I wish people could just see Rand's story at face value without any predetermined bias.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
I doubt a single person there watched it without a predeterm
Apr 17, 2011, 10:24 PM
|
|
ined opinion on it.
And i'm confused, are you saying we should celebrate venture capitalist as heroes?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fan [76]
TigerPulse: 71%
Posts: 212
Joined: 9/3/03
|
we should celebrate venture capitalist as heroes?
Apr 17, 2011, 10:55 PM
|
|
YES!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3350]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 7782
Joined: 11/6/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3350]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 7782
Joined: 11/6/03
|
They've***
Apr 17, 2011, 11:11 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3350]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 7782
Joined: 11/6/03
|
Re: Have they really?
Apr 18, 2011, 1:20 PM
|
|
Provided seed capital for many of the top small, medium and large companies for starters. Which in turn provide the jobs, which in turn provide income tax, which are in turn supposed to be used to keep your country free, provide a free education for your kids etc, but is most likely wasted on some govt. program.
What do you think they do?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3350]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 7782
Joined: 11/6/03
|
Re: Have they really?
Apr 18, 2011, 1:29 PM
|
|
I forgot to add that they hopefully earned a handsome return on their investment which was also taxed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
You're giving them credit for things
Apr 18, 2011, 1:30 PM
[ in reply to Re: Have they really? ] |
|
the government does FOR the public?
A venture capitalist is out to preserve themselves and to make money for themselves. They're not out to do anything to benefit society.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1838]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 6249
Joined: 12/17/06
|
what ever medium you are using to post your
Apr 18, 2011, 2:33 PM
|
|
Garbage was invented, marketed, and produced by one.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Aren't we both using the internet?
Apr 18, 2011, 5:55 PM
|
|
The internet that was created by the Government?
Hmmm.
But don't let the facts get in your way sir.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1838]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 6249
Joined: 12/17/06
|
the computer you are using***
Apr 18, 2011, 7:57 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Not a medium***
Apr 18, 2011, 8:03 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1838]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 6249
Joined: 12/17/06
|
Semantics
Apr 18, 2011, 8:24 PM
|
|
Al Gore invented the internet
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
If all else fails when you make an idiotic point
Apr 18, 2011, 9:04 PM
|
|
try to make a joke to get yourself out of it.
Congratulations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1838]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 6249
Joined: 12/17/06
|
So Gates and jobs are gov't***
Apr 18, 2011, 9:06 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Are you flaming, or are you really having trouble following
Apr 18, 2011, 9:07 PM
|
|
the flow of the argument?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1838]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 6249
Joined: 12/17/06
|
Apparently so, I thought you were arguing
Apr 18, 2011, 9:11 PM
|
|
that the gov't was responsible for everything not the venture capitalist who take the risk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
It's silly to argue either is responsible for everything
Apr 18, 2011, 9:15 PM
|
|
But you missed the flow of the argument. Attheso tried to give credit for schools to venture capitalists. That's illogical, the venture capitalist don't just hand over money to schools.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1838]
TigerPulse: 59%
Posts: 6249
Joined: 12/17/06
|
Sorry, I skipped a bunch***
Apr 18, 2011, 9:17 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3350]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 7782
Joined: 11/6/03
|
You are high comrad.
Apr 18, 2011, 4:31 PM
[ in reply to You're giving them credit for things ] |
|
If you think the government does this you are living in a different world than I. If you aren't out to preserve yourself and make money for yourself you are in bad shape. Especially if you are relying on the government to do it for you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
This doesn't even make sense
Apr 18, 2011, 5:39 PM
|
|
you just argued that the venture capitalist purposely provide education in this country. That isn't even in the slightest bit true.
And for the record, i'm a pure capitalist who doesn't appreciate your perversion of the system.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [762]
TigerPulse: 82%
Posts: 1819
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I simply tell liberals there is a one word reason BMW, Honda
Apr 18, 2011, 6:57 PM
[ in reply to Re: Have they really? ] |
|
Toyota, etc. successfully build cars in America and have well paid & happy employees and American car makers don't ... unions!
Almost all union employees now are government employees. Unions are all but gone now in the private sector because industries that were heavily unionized have collapsed or moved to "Right to Work" states like SC. That's a big reason BMW & Boeing are in SC.
The unions keep northern states from turning into "Right to Work" states because they have successfully kept the ballot systems open. If the voting was done secretly, unions would get completely busted in America. Unions have blocked that and in traditional union states people are scared of openly voting anti-union because of the bullying and death threats and other tactics unions use.
Federal Union employees don't even have the outrageous powers state unions have, because FDR & even Carter saw the inherent conflict of interest and stupidity of giving government employees unlimited negotiating power. They also saw how the money could corrupt the system. Yet Obama is fighting for these state unions as if they are losing constitutional rights that he darn well knows Federal government employees don't have and exactly why even liberals like FDR & Carter refused to give them those rights.
What do white collar & government workers need unions for anyway? It's beyond ridiculous!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10498]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4280
Joined: 11/5/01
|
They don't teach you much at USC do they?***
Apr 18, 2011, 2:26 PM
[ in reply to Have they really? ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [313]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 735
Joined: 10/6/06
|
Re: Well everyone around me in the theater that I was in stood
Apr 18, 2011, 1:56 PM
[ in reply to Well everyone around me in the theater that I was in stood ] |
|
My main problem with the book is that there seems to be an inherent fallacy in equating monetary value, with actual value. The average laborer has commonly held skills and thusly commands a lower wage than a worker with a rarer or more desirable skill set. That doesn't mean that the laborer is less valuable to society in general, just that he commands a lower wage. Without many laborers working for lower wages, the higher wage earner would never earn those wages. Who would cook the industrialist's meals, buy the industrialist's products, tend the crops, fight in the wars?
I earn a decent wage and consider myself fairly lucky that the skills that I possess command modestly above average compensation in the job market, but I'd never dream of looking down on people who make less simply because that's either what they want to do or that's all they can do. Nor do I sit around whining about how I'm going to take my ball and go home because people don't appreciate me enough. The world would go on without me, just as the world would go on without industrialists or chemists or engineers. Other people would step up and take their place and things would carry on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
"Waiting For Superman" was done by a liberal and his
Apr 18, 2011, 6:21 PM
[ in reply to Well everyone around me in the theater that I was in stood ] |
|
investigation into how the school system and unions in the country work left him questioning everything he believed in, yet the average liberal that watches it thinks a conservative made the movie. Sadly, the truth is so bad, when you see it with their own eyes even those on the radical left get a sobering dose of reality. The problem is, getting the leftist media and other Dems & liberals to see that the FACTS do not support their positions and that movies like "Wait For Superman" were in fact done by liberals that started out assuming other factors were the problem!
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Just illegally downloaded this movie
Apr 18, 2011, 12:14 AM
|
|
probably about to watch
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3350]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 7782
Joined: 11/6/03
|
Re: Just illegally downloaded this movie
Apr 18, 2011, 1:22 PM
|
|
I know you're proud of yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
I'm exercising the blessings of capitalism
Apr 18, 2011, 1:29 PM
|
|
That's what Ayn Rand never understood, that capitalism is the enemy of private property.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expert [1287]
TigerPulse: 91%
Posts: 3723
Joined: 8/21/02
|
what planet are you from?***
Apr 18, 2011, 1:32 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3350]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 7782
Joined: 11/6/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
No, you just don't see the bigger picture
Apr 18, 2011, 5:42 PM
|
|
Someone made their internet high speed for quicker downloads in order to entice me to purchase its internet.
Someone developed a program to download the movie, so I would pay them for the program.
Someone created hard drives for me to save my downloads to, so I would buy it.
Someone created the WDTV i'm about to use to play the torrented movie, so I would buy it and they would make money.
There is a reason capitalism is dependent on the government to provide private property rights. I'm sorry you fail to grasp this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1310]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 1540
Joined: 9/6/03
|
Capitalism & private property rights
Apr 18, 2011, 5:54 PM
|
|
We're currently seeing the pitfalls of trying to uphold sacrosanct private property rights (including intellectual property) in our country, while all around the world people are flaunting these "copyrights" as if they did not exist at all. Why? Because if you're a Chinese hacker living in some spiny tendril of Shanghai, there's no incentive to pay for the schematics of weapons systems you'd never be able to afford anyway. We're going to be "out-hacked" by the Chinese if we don't start to talk realistically about the feasibility of protection information and intellectual property rights in the world to come.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Doesn't that prove my point?
Apr 18, 2011, 5:57 PM
|
|
That capitalism doesn't protect private property rights? It just encourages theft?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1310]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 1540
Joined: 9/6/03
|
More or less. It's a faulty patch-up job.***
Apr 18, 2011, 6:26 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Laziness, greed, sloth, and having no appreciation for or
Apr 18, 2011, 7:29 PM
[ in reply to Doesn't that prove my point? ] |
|
understanding of capitalism are the causes of theft!
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Greed is the basis of Capitalism
Apr 18, 2011, 7:41 PM
|
|
so what are you trying to argue?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Greed is not, self interest is. Huge difference!***
Apr 18, 2011, 8:03 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
It isn't in my self interest to take what I want?***
Apr 18, 2011, 8:05 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
You aren't very bright are you? Self interest and greed are
Apr 18, 2011, 8:26 PM
|
|
very different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Explain
Apr 18, 2011, 9:02 PM
|
|
I think you're trying to make a moral distinction that doesn't exist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Someone taught me you learn more by looking the answer up
Apr 18, 2011, 10:18 PM
|
|
for yourself. Go do your homework. By the way, everyone acts in their own self interest, as they should. Greed is a completely different concept. If I don't act in my own self interest I could easily put my life in harms way. Self interest is part of self preservation. Greed is about wanting more than one needs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
I always learned that you should substantiate your arguments
Apr 18, 2011, 10:30 PM
|
|
but what about acting in my own self interest leads me to respect someone else's property rights?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
I've given plenty to substantiate my points. Its not my
Apr 18, 2011, 10:41 PM
|
|
fault you refuse to accept logic or facts.
As far as your question, plenty ...
1. It's the law
2. One has to give respect to get respect
3. If you can't obtain something properly you'll never be able to retain it
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
That's the point i'm making, capitalism doesn't encourage
Apr 18, 2011, 10:44 PM
|
|
property rights. It has relies on the GOVERNMENT to FORCE everyone respect property rights thus forcing me to do things that AREN'T IN MY SELF INTEREST
What is so hard to understand?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Its not in your self interest to infringe on other peoples
Apr 18, 2011, 11:18 PM
|
|
rights, then you would have no rights yourself. You are talking chaos, which is not in anyone's self interest.
And earlier you said, multiple times, that capitalism needed the government to protect it from capitalism. Now you are saying capitalism needs the government to protect it from people's self interest. Which is it? Make up your mind!
Capitalism is best with as little government as possible. Go to Youtube and listen to Milton Friedman. You know, the guy that advised Presidents and won the Nobel Price. Maybe you'll learn something.
By the way, ALL systems need government to a degree because all systems need laws & rules. You're making idiotic arguments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recruit [97]
TigerPulse: 47%
Posts: 83
Joined: 2/14/01
|
Re: Greed is the basis of Capitalism
Apr 18, 2011, 10:10 PM
[ in reply to Greed is the basis of Capitalism ] |
|
> so what are you trying to argue?
What are YOU trying to argue? How do you define capitalism? If it is so bad, what are you advocating as the ideal system? I anxiously await your responses. For someone who claims to not be a Democrat, you sure seem very adamant about attacking the private sector while defending governmental intervention.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
I think Capitalism is by far the best system
Apr 18, 2011, 10:35 PM
|
|
i just hate the perversion of it where people like BlueCaddy want to prevent people from actually having a chance to succeed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
### are you talking about? How am I preventing or wanting
Apr 18, 2011, 11:00 PM
|
|
others not to succeed? You are just stupid if you think that! I'm a hard core conservative & libertarian. I was in a car accident in high school and hurt my spine. I've been in a wheelchair since I was 15.
Despite my injury I did something few teens with spinal cord injuries do - I went to college! I come from a very middle class family and was the first person in my family on either side to go to a 4 year college and earn a degree.
I was the 3rd person to attend Clemson and live on campus in a wheelchair. The other 2 only beat me by a year. The state of SC deemed USC as the school handicapped kids should go to for a very long time and did not give one dime to Clemson for handicap accommodations. Clemson was not prepared but did everything they could to help us make things work. And God didn't exactly make Clemson wheelchair accessible, but I pushed my butt all over that campus & town and was strong as hell by the time I graduated 4 years later!
I've overcome more than you can imagine and have busted my #### and done it on my own with little to no help from anyone. I own my own business and my house and an investment property in one of the nicest areas of downtown Charleston. I know exactly what can be done with drive and determination and sheer will despite no help and all the odds stacked against you. And as such, I want anyone willing to work hard to succeed. Thus, I hold no quarter for able bodied people that make excuses because I more than almost anyone know it's a bunch of BS!
And I have never backed down from a fight nor physical confrontation despite being in a wheelchair and the nonsense you are talking would have me in your face if you said such stupid nonsense to me in person!
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Even worse
Apr 18, 2011, 11:04 PM
|
|
you're one of these, "Look at me! I've worked so much harder than anyone" types while ignoring what has been given to you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Wow! It's sad you are so clueless. Goodnight!!***
Apr 18, 2011, 11:19 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
That is 100% incorrect! Capitalism is dependent on private
Apr 18, 2011, 7:23 PM
[ in reply to I'm exercising the blessings of capitalism ] |
|
property rights! The enemy to property rights in Communism!
Go read the Communist Manifesto. It calls for the end to all private property and for all property to be held by the people, which means the government. That's why Stalin, Castro, the Chinese, Pol Pot and every other country that has had a Communist revolution end up killing millions of their citizens. No one gives up their rightfully owned private property without a fight.
The main reason indians on reservations live so poorly is they don't own the land. Indian reservation, like the projects in inner cities, and perfect examples of the failures and unintended consequences of welfare programs.
John Stossel did a great story on this recently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Then why does Capitalism need the Government to
Apr 18, 2011, 7:46 PM
|
|
protect private property rights from itself?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Only the government can enforce laws. Without government
Apr 18, 2011, 8:17 PM
|
|
there would be chaos. No one is saying government is bad. What's bad is big government, uncontrolled, unfettered government. A central Government is needed, but only to the extent that it limits itself to those things that ONLY the government can do ... and within the limits of our Constitution. Those things are police, self defense aka the military, foreign treaties, and a few other things.
SC would be far better off is there was no Federal gas tax. We don't get back what we pay in gas taxes to maintain our roads. SC is what's called a "donor" state. We pay more in gas taxes than we get back. It's another government redistributive program that does more harm than good.
Capitalism does not need government to protect private property rights from capitalism. It needs the government to enforce individuals rights to private property via rule of law so wrongful claims or the muzzle of a gun don't decide ownership. If anything, government has become one of the biggest abusers and dangers to private property rights.
Go read or listen to Milton Friedman. He states there is a clear need for government, but a weak and benign central government.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
So the government should only exist to infringe on
Apr 18, 2011, 9:06 PM
|
|
the rights of those who lack resources?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3350]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 7782
Joined: 11/6/03
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
He didn't really say anything relevant
Apr 18, 2011, 9:48 PM
|
|
to the argument.
But I'll listen if i'm just missing it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3350]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 7782
Joined: 11/6/03
|
If you don't hear the relevance to the argument then I
Apr 18, 2011, 9:56 PM
|
|
have nothing left to say. I could learn more and gain more understanding from debating with my 6 year old. Unbelievable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5093]
TigerPulse: 42%
Posts: 17074
Joined: 7/19/05
|
Just because he uses the word greed doesn't mean it's
Apr 18, 2011, 9:57 PM
|
|
relevant.
He's arguing that greed in capitalism is better than greed in communism.
That's not what we're debating.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1310]
TigerPulse: 78%
Posts: 1540
Joined: 9/6/03
|
Why would even Rand's lackeys be satisfied with this trash?
Apr 18, 2011, 5:49 PM
|
|
To quote Roger Ebert, one the country's best critics, who gave the film 1 out of 4 possible stars:
"Let's say you know the novel, you agree with Ayn Rand, you're an objectivist or a libertarian, and you've been waiting eagerly for this movie. Man, are you going to get a letdown. It’s not enough that a movie agree with you, in however an incoherent and murky fashion. It would help if it were like, you know, entertaining?
The movie is constructed of a few kinds of scenes: (1) People sipping their drinks in clubby surroundings and exchanging dialogue that sounds like corporate lingo; (2) railroads, and lots of ’em; (3) limousines driving through cities in ruin and arriving at ornate buildings; (4) city skylines; (5) the beauties of Colorado. There is also a love scene, which is shown not merely from the waist up but from the ears up. The man keeps his shirt on. This may be disappointing for libertarians, who I believe enjoy rumpy-pumpy as much as anyone.
Oh, and there is Wisconsin. Dagny and Hank ride blissfully in Taggart’s new high-speed train, and then Hank suggests they take a trip to Wisconsin, where the state’s policies caused the suppression of an engine that runs on the ozone in the air, or something (the film’s detailed explanation won’t clear this up). They decide to drive there. That’s when you’ll enjoy the beautiful landscape photography of the deserts of Wisconsin. My advice to the filmmakers: If you want to use a desert, why not just refer to Wisconsin as "New Mexico"?
"Atlas Shrugged" closes with a title card saying, "End of Part 1." Frequently throughout the film, characters repeat the phrase, "Who is John Galt?" Well they might ask. A man in black, always shot in shadow, is apparently John Galt. If you want to get a good look at him and find out why everybody is asking, I hope you can find out in Part 2. I don’t think you can hold out for Part 3."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3350]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 7782
Joined: 11/6/03
|
Re: Why would even Rand's lackeys be satisfied with this trash?
Apr 18, 2011, 9:50 PM
|
|
Some see the film for the production. Some see it for the substance and the "dialogue". Maybe I like fast trains and corporate lingo. Ebert can bite me, but I liked it. If you don't that's ok too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2283]
TigerPulse: 98%
Posts: 2243
Joined: 12/30/10
|
I hope it's better than The Fountainhead
Apr 18, 2011, 6:09 PM
|
|
I just can't imagine anyone being able to pull off a movie adaptaion of Atlas Shrugged either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 97
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
