Greenspan: Student of Ayn Rand

How does that imply that Rynd influenced our fiscal policy???

[quote]zed962 wrote:
The Politics and Nicomachean Ethics are two of my favorite reads ever. They were assigned in a political philosophy class but I held on to the books just to have in my library.[/quote]

Where was the class?

Zap: I, too, am an engineer, but I am open to the possibility that there are men who have seen more clearly or more thoroughly than I have.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
HH you need to expand your reading list beyond Rand.

She is a horrible wordsmith and her philosophy of Objectivism seems to be about as deep as the average teenager’s thoughts.

Of course maybe her crushing dullness blinds me to her deeper meaning. [/quote]

I keep trying to expand his horizons here, because there are alot of other people out there besides the heartless woman that is Rand.

[quote]nephorm wrote:
Zap: I, too, am an engineer, but I am open to the possibility that there are men who have seen more clearly or more thoroughly than I have. [/quote]

When they can’t even express themselves clearly and concisely I have a hard time believing that they see more clearly than I, or anyone with half a brain does.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
So, if you enjoyed the last 18 years of relative prosperity, say a silent ‘Thank You!’ to both Mr. Greenspan AND his mentor, Ayn Rand.[/quote]

I’ve had quite a few heated discussions in the last couple of days about Greenspan with some of my colleagues. Particularly in Berkeley, he has a lot of fans.

I am not one of them.

Greenspan does indeed remind me of Ayn Rand: overly optimistic and simplistic. His contribution to our prosperity was mostly through a constant “smoke and mirrors” show that was very effective at giving the Wall Street crowd a – many times false – sense of security.

He is the epitome of a guy that is brilliant at looking good, rather than doing good.

And some people love him for that, since they feel optimism – even unfounded – is a very good thing for a capitalist system.

Greenspan is perfectly OK with us living far beyond our means; in fact, the provided large incentives to that.

He created the Over-the-limit-Credit-Cards-plus-One-Million-Dollar Interest-Only-Mortgage culture.

Smoke and mirrors.

Eventually people will realize that we’re living off money that does not really exist. That we are living so far beyond our means that it isn’t even funny anymore.

And it will be a very hard fall.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:

Killing people isn’t necessarily imposing ideas. Sometimes it is just killing them all and letting god sort it out.[/quote]

That’s true. However, if I were to resort to cheap tactics to insist it applies to all killing, I could say that every action is preceded by an idea, since an idea can be defined as a thought or conception that potentially or actually exists in the mind as a product of mental activity.

Since killing is an action, which is necessarily preceded by a thought, all killing is the imposition of ideas on people (even if it’s just an idea you had 2 seconds prior to the action).

That’s if I were to resort to cheap tactics, but I’m not that kind of person. :slight_smile:

[quote]CaptainLogic wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
CaptainLogic wrote:
nephorm wrote:
Just goes to show…

Everyone makes mistakes.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Nice one Nep.

BTW: Captain Logic or Orbital Boner, or whatever the F you’re calling yourself this week, what is your avatar a picture of? The Ninja Turtle was ‘better’ – although it still looked like some kind of GD monkey to me.

It’s a picture of a character from a Godzilla movie, not sure which one.

I seem to remember one of her objectivist statements being: 1) That no one has the right to seek values from others by physical force, or impose ideas on others by physical force.

I also seem to remember you advocating a ‘bomb the middle east flat’ philosophy a few threads back in the politics forum.

Maybe you should read her books a little more closely…

PS Glad you’re back to your cranky old self.[/quote]

You are allowed to defend yourself, which is the complete statement. Please don’t chop up her words to suit yourself.

Cranky? Yeah, I took a break from Carbolin 19 and am near the end of a 3 week run with Superdrol. Gained 11 pounds and am getting ready to spar the youngsters (35-42 year old age group).

[quote]hspder wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
So, if you enjoyed the last 18 years of relative prosperity, say a silent ‘Thank You!’ to both Mr. Greenspan AND his mentor, Ayn Rand.

I’ve had quite a few heated discussions in the last couple of days about Greenspan with some of my colleagues. Particularly in Berkeley, he has a lot of fans.

I am not one of them.

Greenspan does indeed remind me of Ayn Rand: overly optimistic and simplistic. His contribution to our prosperity was mostly through a constant “smoke and mirrors” show that was very effective at giving the Wall Street crowd a – many times false – sense of security.

He is the epitome of a guy that is brilliant at looking good, rather than doing good.

And some people love him for that, since they feel optimism – even unfounded – is a very good thing for a capitalist system.

Greenspan is perfectly OK with us living far beyond our means; in fact, the provided large incentives to that.

He created the Over-the-limit-Credit-Cards-plus-One-Million-Dollar Interest-Only-Mortgage culture.

Smoke and mirrors.

Eventually people will realize that we’re living off money that does not really exist. That we are living so far beyond our means that it isn’t even funny anymore.

And it will be a very hard fall.
[/quote]

I had to chuckle here because these are probably things that Miss Rand would say to Alan. The whole gist of Atlas Shrugged is letting a welfare state reach its final collapse and not rescuing it. I think Alan believed that the collapse would be worse overall and decided to step in.

In the novel, Alan would be the character Wesley Mouch, so you can imagine her berating Alan.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
HH you need to expand your reading list beyond Rand.

She is a horrible wordsmith and her philosophy of Objectivism seems to be about as deep as the average teenager’s thoughts.

Of course maybe her crushing dullness blinds me to her deeper meaning.

I keep trying to expand his horizons here, because there are alot of other people out there besides the heartless woman that is Rand.

[/quote]

LMAO! Did you read something of hers? I read (and liked) a lot of London, The Road being the best IMO.

Just because Rand is my favorite philospher doesn’t mean that she is all I read. Sheesh!

[quote]monte1978 wrote:
How does that imply that Rynd influenced our fiscal policy???[/quote]

Atlas Shrugged – buy a copy. What would happen to our economy if Atlas did indeed shrug? Read the book (several times) and learn.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
The whole gist of Atlas Shrugged is letting a welfare state reach its final collapse and not rescuing it. I think Alan believed that the collapse would be worse overall and decided to step in.[/quote]

Welfare state? You think the US is a “Welfare state”?

That’s just funny. Really. You need to spend some time in Europe to see what a “welfare state” is.

Also, my whole point is that what Greenspan did will not prevent a collapse. In fact, his actions may have made a collapse more likely – and more violent.

When you are moving 200 mph in the wrong direction, you have many more options than just drop a concrete wall in front of the train to stop it. You can slow it down, and calmly reverse direction.

What Greenspan did, though, was hit the gas, simply because slowing down was just too unpopular for him.

He wanted to look good rather than do good.

I don’t quite think Greenspan is comparable to Wesley Mouch…

It would’ve been interesting if Rand ever ran for office. She could have quite possibly been president…
Goodbye to welfare; medicaid; social security; most taxes; etc.

[quote]Proteinpowda wrote:
It would’ve been interesting if Rand ever ran for office. She could have quite possibly been president… [/quote]

I doubt it. People like to hear that they can have the cake and it too; “small government” and “much lower / no taxes” are extremely popular talking points, but the moment somebody pointed out that she was against any kind of state welfare – i.e., people would be fully responsible for paying for their retirement, healthcare, etc. – she wouldn’t stand a chance of ever winning.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
When they can’t even express themselves clearly and concisely I have a hard time believing that they see more clearly than I, or anyone with half a brain does.
[/quote]

This isn’t the thread for it, but there are reasons that philosophic speech might be esoteric, rather than exoteric. At least one reason is the threat of persecution, and another is that human beings do not tend to learn by being brought to a conclusion, they learn by weighing and determining.

Rousseau is very clear. He isn’t concise, but do you want the “meaning of life” to fit in a fortune cookie?

[quote]nephorm wrote:
human beings do not tend to learn by being brought to a conclusion, they learn by weighing and determining.[/quote]

Wow. That is indeed one of the smartest things I’ve read over here in a long time.

Philosophy is definitely not my field of study, but I respect it, and I respect philosophers. I believe having, as a goal, to make people think – rather than something more palpable and concrete, like Scientists like myself or Engineers like Zap usually have – an honorable and useful one.

In fact, I feel we spend too little time exposing our young kids to philosophy, especially philosophy that doesn’t necessarily fit in the “familiar” for average Americans.

Yes, because I think one fundamental mistake most people make when reading philosophy is the same they make in everyday life – they try to match what they read or hear to what the already have in their own little world, and completely miss the point, which is to expand that world.

On the other hand, I do understand a certain resentment that many people have against philosophers; many of them come across as arrogant, overbearing and dismissive, and that puts people off; I wish people would be able to see through that “cover” and not let that perceived attitude put them off, but I also wish some philosophers did for philosophy what Carl Sagan did for Physics…

(it is not a coincidence that Carl Sagan himself got so involved in philosophy in the latter part of his life; however, he died before he could have an impact on that field too…)

Zap and Nephorm,

The main character in Atlas Shrugged is also an engineer. He discovers a way to extract atmospheric static electricity and make it useable. When asked why he refuses to bring the machine to market, his response is: “This is the strike of the men of the mind, Miss Taggart. This is THE MIND on strike.”

How anyone could find this dull and boring is beyond me.

The main theme of the book then is for intelligient men everywhere to change this miserable world by refusing to go along with its evil moral code (altruism). Work at some menial job and let the world finally see the results of its code, when there are no longer victims to milk.

Hell, you might even become a high school teacher…:slight_smile:

[quote]Proteinpowda wrote:
I don’t quite think Greenspan is comparable to Wesley Mouch…

It would’ve been interesting if Rand ever ran for office. She could have quite possibly been president…
Goodbye to welfare; medicaid; social security; most taxes; etc. [/quote]

A dream come true!!

[quote]nephorm wrote:

Rousseau is very clear. He isn’t concise, but do you want the “meaning of life” to fit in a fortune cookie?[/quote]

Yes

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Proteinpowda wrote:
I don’t quite think Greenspan is comparable to Wesley Mouch…

It would’ve been interesting if Rand ever ran for office. She could have quite possibly been president…
Goodbye to welfare; medicaid; social security; most taxes; etc.

A dream come true!!

[/quote]

More like a nightmare. Elimination of those social programs would be a disaster.

The key is to keep the need (and funding) for them minimized.