On Wednesday, June 8, 2022 at 4:03:24 AM UTC-4, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
> In article <d8b004b7-b984-444b...@googlegroups.com>,
> Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com> writes:
>
> > > >> >> Exactly. Economics is not a zero-sum game. The people who want to
> > > >> >> help the poor by pulling down the rich don't get that.
> It depends.
> > > >> >Also, while the people in America who are rich generally got
> > > >> >that way by making themselves useful, in Europe the rich
> > > >> >got that way by robbing the peasants.
> I think that you need to factor slavery into the equation.
> > > >> People who don't have a knee-jerk "Ayn Rand is the Antichrist"
> > > >> reaction might find the "Atlas Shrugged" movie to be of interest.

'The Fountainhead' is a much better movie.
pt

In article <t7pl46$bhd$1@gioia.aioe.org>,
Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de> wrote:
>In article <d8b004b7-b984-444b-bee8-451f3d1da495n@googlegroups.com>,
>Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> writes:
>
>> > >> >> Exactly. Economics is not a zero-sum game. The people who want to
>> > >> >> help the poor by pulling down the rich don't get that.
>
>It depends.
>
>> > >> >Also, while the people in America who are rich generally got
>> > >> >that way by making themselves useful, in Europe the rich
>> > >> >got that way by robbing the peasants.
>
>I think that you need to factor slavery into the equation.
>
>> > >> People who don't have a knee-jerk "Ayn Rand is the Antichrist"
>> > >> reaction might find the "Atlas Shrugged" movie to be of interest.
>
>Not the antichrist, but a huge hypocrit. In her later years, she lived
>off of welfare. She also denied that her smoking had anything to do
>with her lung cancer. Difficult to find someone more stupid.
>

Just switch over to Fox and pick pretty much any of their broadcasters.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

On Tue, 07 Jun 2022 15:10:58 -0400, J. Clarke
<jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 09:51:44 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
>wrote:
>
>>On Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 12:34:07 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
>>
>>> Exactly. Economics is not a zero-sum game. The people who want to
>>> help the poor by pulling down the rich don't get that.
>>
>>Oh, that's something I agree with. Successful businessmen are like
>>the goose that produces the golden eggs - businesses that benefit
>>society by providing opportunities to create wealth and useful
>>innovations are valuable.
>>
>>Not all businesses are good corporate citizens, however.
>>
>>Also, while the people in America who are rich generally got
>>that way by making themselves useful, in Europe the rich
>>got that way by robbing the peasants. This is what makes their
>>political culture more amenable to left-wing ideologies.
>
>People who don't have a knee-jerk "Ayn Rand is the Antichrist"
>reaction might find the "Atlas Shrugged" movie to be of interest.
>Dagny Taggart's brother is an incompetent buffoon with money, power,
>and connections, and much of Dagny's time is wasted cleaning up his
>messes and working around his mismanagement of what should in a
>rational world have been _her_ railroad. I don't recall now how
>accurately that reflects the novel--it's been a long, long time since
>I read it.

My feeling after seeing it the first time was that it captured the
/feel/ of the novel, but I could not be sure of the details because I
didn't have a clear memory of the novel.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 12:47:40 -0700 (PDT), Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com>
wrote:

>On Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 3:11:04 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 09:51:44 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
>> wrote:
>> >On Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 12:34:07 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
>> >
>> >> Exactly. Economics is not a zero-sum game. The people who want to
>> >> help the poor by pulling down the rich don't get that.
>> >
>> >Oh, that's something I agree with. Successful businessmen are like
>> >the goose that produces the golden eggs - businesses that benefit
>> >society by providing opportunities to create wealth and useful
>> >innovations are valuable.
>> >
>> >Not all businesses are good corporate citizens, however.
>> >
>> >Also, while the people in America who are rich generally got
>> >that way by making themselves useful, in Europe the rich
>> >got that way by robbing the peasants. This is what makes their
>> >political culture more amenable to left-wing ideologies.
>> People who don't have a knee-jerk "Ayn Rand is the Antichrist"
>> reaction might find the "Atlas Shrugged" movie to be of interest.
>> Dagny Taggart's brother is an incompetent buffoon with money, power,
>> and connections, and much of Dagny's time is wasted cleaning up his
>> messes and working around his mismanagement of what should in a
>> rational world have been _her_ railroad. I don't recall now how
>> accurately that reflects the novel--it's been a long, long time since
>> I read it.
>
>Haven't watched the films, but have read AS a time or two.
>Your assessments of Jim and Dagny Taggart are accurate.
>
>Dagny may have been a wish-fulfillment fantasy for Rand -
>her heroes and heroines do tend to be Sue/Stu-ish - but,
>unfortunately, the real world had plenty of Jim Taggarts.

She is a typical Randian heroine, to be sure. The book has at least
three male creators-of-value (plus John Galt), so she is implicitly
exceptional compared to her male equivalents.

The film focuses, in a sense, on Dagny and Hank Reardon. Ragnar the
Pirate appears mostly in headlines (and maybe appears in the 3rd
film). Francisco D'Anconia plays a didactic role in the 2nd film.

The films each have a different cast. This can be disturbing at first,
but the casts all work well enough. The third starts with a summary of
the situation, perhaps in the hope of attracting people who haven't
seen the first two. The second one, IIRC, has the Tunnel Disaster
which, IIRC, puts footage from an otherwise-lackluster runaway train
movie to better use than the original did (IMHO, of course).

>I'm not sure how common legacy CEOs are nowadays, given
>how many of such once dominant firms have been merged into
>larger operations, if they haven't been eclipsed by newer ones
>based on tech not yet invented when the novel was written.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 09:44:07 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
wrote:

>On Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 10:37:31 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 10:46:54 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
>> wrote:
>> >I will quote it:
>> >
>> >"It’s an established principle of political science — supported by studies that
>> >look back as far as the 1600s — that countries have higher chances of
>> >terrorism, civil war, rising crime, and political chaos if their populations contain
>> >lots of unmarried young men without clear economic prospects."
>
>> Silly me.
>>
>> I thought the normal result of lots of excess males was to start a
>> ground war so they could die gloriously in combat.
>>
>> Well, they gotta have /some/ use.
>
>Historically, that indeed _is_ how societies have coped with the
>issue. But that is also something worth making an effort to avoid.

China and India may (or may not) be building up to using /exactly/
that solution.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Wed, 08 Jun 2022 13:05:54 +0000, James Nicoll wrote:

> In article <t7pl46$bhd$1@gioia.aioe.org>,
> Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de>
> wrote:
>>In article <d8b004b7-b984-444b-bee8-451f3d1da495n@googlegroups.com>,
>>Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> writes:
>>
>>> > >> >> Exactly. Economics is not a zero-sum game. The people who want
>>> > >> >> to help the poor by pulling down the rich don't get that.
>>
>>It depends.
>>
>>> > >> >Also, while the people in America who are rich generally got
>>> > >> >that way by making themselves useful, in Europe the rich got
>>> > >> >that way by robbing the peasants.
>>
>>I think that you need to factor slavery into the equation.
>>
>>> > >> People who don't have a knee-jerk "Ayn Rand is the Antichrist"
>>> > >> reaction might find the "Atlas Shrugged" movie to be of interest.
>>
>>Not the antichrist, but a huge hypocrit. In her later years, she lived
>>off of welfare. She also denied that her smoking had anything to do
>>with her lung cancer. Difficult to find someone more stupid.
>>
>>
> Just switch over to Fox and pick pretty much any of their broadcasters.

And then turn over to CNN to see the mental patients.

On Wednesday, June 8, 2022 at 12:50:13 PM UTC-4, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 09:44:07 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
> wrote:
>
> >On Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 10:37:31 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:
> >> On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 10:46:54 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
> >> wrote:
> >> >I will quote it:
> >> >
> >> >"It’s an established principle of political science — supported by studies that
> >> >look back as far as the 1600s — that countries have higher chances of
> >> >terrorism, civil war, rising crime, and political chaos if their populations contain
> >> >lots of unmarried young men without clear economic prospects."
> >
> >> Silly me.
> >>
> >> I thought the normal result of lots of excess males was to start a
> >> ground war so they could die gloriously in combat.
> >>
> >> Well, they gotta have /some/ use.
> >
> >Historically, that indeed _is_ how societies have coped with the
> >issue. But that is also something worth making an effort to avoid.
> China and India may (or may not) be building up to using /exactly/
> that solution.

India and China both have substantial excess males in the younger population,
but China's overall population of military age males is crashing, as the generations
born before the one child policy age out.

China (and also Russia) will have great difficulty fielding large armies in future.

Pt

On Wed, 8 Jun 2022 19:04:35 -0700 (PDT), "pete...@gmail.com"
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, June 8, 2022 at 12:50:13 PM UTC-4, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 09:44:07 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 10:37:31 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:
>> >> On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 10:46:54 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >I will quote it:
>> >> >
>> >> >"It’s an established principle of political science — supported by studies that
>> >> >look back as far as the 1600s — that countries have higher chances of
>> >> >terrorism, civil war, rising crime, and political chaos if their populations contain
>> >> >lots of unmarried young men without clear economic prospects."
>> >
>> >> Silly me.
>> >>
>> >> I thought the normal result of lots of excess males was to start a
>> >> ground war so they could die gloriously in combat.
>> >>
>> >> Well, they gotta have /some/ use.
>> >
>> >Historically, that indeed _is_ how societies have coped with the
>> >issue. But that is also something worth making an effort to avoid.
>> China and India may (or may not) be building up to using /exactly/
>> that solution.
>
>India and China both have substantial excess males in the younger population,
>but China's overall population of military age males is crashing, as the generations
>born before the one child policy age out.

They also have a past history of war (late 60s?) and a more recent one
of skirmishes over a disputed region.

>China (and also Russia) will have great difficulty fielding large armies in future.

IIRC, I have encountered articles claiming that:
-- the local defense forces of those "breakaway regions" in Eastern
Ukraine are being used as cannon fodder to save Russian lives
-- Putin is moving to mandatory conscription -- ie, slavery, pure and
simple

both of which might suggest he is having a problem right now.

Of course, he still has more potential soldiers than Ukraine has. So
he might win ... eventually.

Macron would be /so/ happy if he did, apparently.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Thursday, June 9, 2022 at 12:21:13 PM UTC-4, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Jun 2022 19:04:35 -0700 (PDT), "pete...@gmail.com"
> <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, June 8, 2022 at 12:50:13 PM UTC-4, Paul S Person wrote:
> >> On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 09:44:07 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 10:37:31 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:
> >> >> On Mon, 6 Jun 2022 10:46:54 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >I will quote it:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >"It’s an established principle of political science — supported by studies that
> >> >> >look back as far as the 1600s — that countries have higher chances of
> >> >> >terrorism, civil war, rising crime, and political chaos if their populations contain
> >> >> >lots of unmarried young men without clear economic prospects."
> >> >
> >> >> Silly me.
> >> >>
> >> >> I thought the normal result of lots of excess males was to start a
> >> >> ground war so they could die gloriously in combat.
> >> >>
> >> >> Well, they gotta have /some/ use.
> >> >
> >> >Historically, that indeed _is_ how societies have coped with the
> >> >issue. But that is also something worth making an effort to avoid.
> >> China and India may (or may not) be building up to using /exactly/
> >> that solution.
> >
> >India and China both have substantial excess males in the younger population,
> >but China's overall population of military age males is crashing, as the generations
> >born before the one child policy age out.
> They also have a past history of war (late 60s?) and a more recent one
> of skirmishes over a disputed region.
> >China (and also Russia) will have great difficulty fielding large armies in future.
> IIRC, I have encountered articles claiming that:
> -- the local defense forces of those "breakaway regions" in Eastern
> Ukraine are being used as cannon fodder to save Russian lives
> -- Putin is moving to mandatory conscription -- ie, slavery, pure and
> simple
>
> both of which might suggest he is having a problem right now.
>
> Of course, he still has more potential soldiers than Ukraine has. So
> he might win ... eventually.
>
> Macron would be /so/ happy if he did, apparently.
> --
> "I begin to envy Petronius."
> "I have envied him long since."

Putin is still thinking way beyond Ukraine. Just today:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-america/courage-strength-optimism/putin-offers-new-threat-to-estonia

TLDR; he considers himself a new Peter the Great, destined to return Russia
to overarching superpower status.

pt

On Thursday, June 9, 2022 at 10:21:13 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:

> Macron would be /so/ happy if he did, apparently.

Now, now. Macron may even have a point. Humiliating someone with
his finger on a nuclear button could end badly.

John Savard

On Thursday, June 9, 2022 at 1:16:30 PM UTC-6, pete...@gmail.com wrote:

> Putin is still thinking way beyond Ukraine. Just today:
> https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-america/courage-strength-optimism/putin-offers-new-threat-to-estonia
>
> TLDR; he considers himself a new Peter the Great, destined to return Russia
> to overarching superpower status.

Of course, we cannot allow him to invade Estonia... but I'm sure he is going
to try very hard to come up with a stratagem that will fix things so that we
don't dare try to stop him.

And then NATO falls apart, and he winds up taking over all of continental
Europe, to have "Festung Europa" as Hitler did. In Georgia and Ukraine, he
has been transparently copying Hitler's playbook.

John Savard

On Friday, June 10, 2022 at 5:43:51 AM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Thursday, June 9, 2022 at 1:16:30 PM UTC-6, pete...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Putin is still thinking way beyond Ukraine. Just today:
> > https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-america/courage-strength-optimism/putin-offers-new-threat-to-estonia
> >
> > TLDR; he considers himself a new Peter the Great, destined to return Russia
> > to overarching superpower status.
> Of course, we cannot allow him to invade Estonia... but I'm sure he is going
> to try very hard to come up with a stratagem that will fix things so that we
> don't dare try to stop him.
>
> And then NATO falls apart, and he winds up taking over all of continental
> Europe, to have "Festung Europa" as Hitler did. In Georgia and Ukraine, he
> has been transparently copying Hitler's playbook.

Yes, that's the thrust of the speech. It makes clear that he feels that Russia
has a manifest destiny to extend its culture and hegemony to all of Europe,
not just Ukraine.

pt

On Wed, 8 Jun 2022 00:51:14 -0700 (PDT), Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com>
wrote:

>On Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 5:16:37 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>> On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 12:47:40 -0700 (PDT), Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 3:11:04 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>> >> On Tue, 7 Jun 2022 09:51:44 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >On Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 12:34:07 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Exactly. Economics is not a zero-sum game. The people who want to
>> >> >> help the poor by pulling down the rich don't get that.
>> >> >
>> >> >Oh, that's something I agree with. Successful businessmen are like
>> >> >the goose that produces the golden eggs - businesses that benefit
>> >> >society by providing opportunities to create wealth and useful
>> >> >innovations are valuable.
>> >> >
>> >> >Not all businesses are good corporate citizens, however.
>> >> >
>> >> >Also, while the people in America who are rich generally got
>> >> >that way by making themselves useful, in Europe the rich
>> >> >got that way by robbing the peasants. This is what makes their
>> >> >political culture more amenable to left-wing ideologies.
>> >> People who don't have a knee-jerk "Ayn Rand is the Antichrist"
>> >> reaction might find the "Atlas Shrugged" movie to be of interest.
>> >> Dagny Taggart's brother is an incompetent buffoon with money, power,
>> >> and connections, and much of Dagny's time is wasted cleaning up his
>> >> messes and working around his mismanagement of what should in a
>> >> rational world have been _her_ railroad. I don't recall now how
>> >> accurately that reflects the novel--it's been a long, long time since
>> >> I read it.
>> >
>> >Haven't watched the films, but have read AS a time or two.
>> >Your assessments of Jim and Dagny Taggart are accurate.
>> >
>> >Dagny may have been a wish-fulfillment fantasy for Rand -
>> >her heroes and heroines do tend to be Sue/Stu-ish - but,
>> >unfortunately, the real world had plenty of Jim Taggarts.
>> >
>> >I'm not sure how common legacy CEOs are nowadays, given
>> >how many of such once dominant firms have been merged into
>> >larger operations, if they haven't been eclipsed by newer ones
>> >based on tech not yet invented when the novel was written.
>> My mother once fixed me up with the daughter of the legacy CEO of a
>> very large life insurance company. If I had known then what I know
>> now, I would have made better use of that connection--at the time life
>> insurance was beneath my dignity as a lordly _engineer_ but now that
>> I'm working in it I find that I like it better than engineering. But
>> Emelia Hartford the girl was not--she had the Ferrari but no
>> personality whatsoever.
>>
>
>Did Ms Hartford share the name of the city, or the underwriter?

Emelia Hartford is a girl with a Ferrari who is a great deal more
interesting that the insurance CEO's daughter. Google her. The
insurance company, by the way, was not located within 1000 miles of
Hartford. Neither is Emelia.

>An alias to protect the lady?
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hartford
>
>The Hartford was engulfed and devoured by ITT in 1970,
>but was spun off in 1995, and has been an independent
>firm, since.
>
>Fun fact: the call letters of the Hartford stations (AM, FM & TV)
>WTIC stand for the old ownership: Travelers Insurance Company.
>Travelers started divesting itself of those sticks in 1973.
>
>I guess a neo-acronym could be The Insurance Capital.
>
>> That insurance company no longer exists, and the one where I work now
>> changes CEOs regularly as a matter of policy, so no legacies.
>> >

On Wed, 8 Jun 2022 20:09:03 -0000 (UTC), Magewolf <Magewolf@nc.rr.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 08 Jun 2022 13:05:54 +0000, James Nicoll wrote:
>
>> In article <t7pl46$bhd$1@gioia.aioe.org>,
>> Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de>
>> wrote:
>>>In article <d8b004b7-b984-444b-bee8-451f3d1da495n@googlegroups.com>,
>>>Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> > >> >> Exactly. Economics is not a zero-sum game. The people who want
>>>> > >> >> to help the poor by pulling down the rich don't get that.
>>>
>>>It depends.
>>>
>>>> > >> >Also, while the people in America who are rich generally got
>>>> > >> >that way by making themselves useful, in Europe the rich got
>>>> > >> >that way by robbing the peasants.
>>>
>>>I think that you need to factor slavery into the equation.
>>>
>>>> > >> People who don't have a knee-jerk "Ayn Rand is the Antichrist"
>>>> > >> reaction might find the "Atlas Shrugged" movie to be of interest.
>>>
>>>Not the antichrist, but a huge hypocrit. In her later years, she lived
>>>off of welfare.

No, she lived off of Social Security, into which she had been paying
ever since she first made a buck in the US. There is nothing
"hypocritical" about someone who was forced by law to give money to
the government to expect to get the service which the government
promised in exchange for that money.

If she had had a choice not to give the money to the government and
gave it to the government anyway, then she would be a hypocrite.

>>>She also denied that her smoking had anything to do
>>>with her lung cancer.

Care to provide a quote on that point?

>Difficult to find someone more stupid.

So anyone who disagrees with you is "stupid"?

>>>
>> Just switch over to Fox and pick pretty much any of their broadcasters.
>
>And then turn over to CNN to see the mental patients.

On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 02:40:01 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
<jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

>On Thursday, June 9, 2022 at 10:21:13 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:
>
>> Macron would be /so/ happy if he did, apparently.
>
>Now, now. Macron may even have a point. Humiliating someone with
>his finger on a nuclear button could end badly.

Remember that Macron has his finger on such a button.

On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 23:04:09 -0400, J. Clarke
<jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 8 Jun 2022 20:09:03 -0000 (UTC), Magewolf <Magewolf@nc.rr.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 08 Jun 2022 13:05:54 +0000, James Nicoll wrote:
>>
>>> In article <t7pl46$bhd$1@gioia.aioe.org>,
>>> Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>>In article <d8b004b7-b984-444b-bee8-451f3d1da495n@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> > >> >> Exactly. Economics is not a zero-sum game. The people who want
>>>>> > >> >> to help the poor by pulling down the rich don't get that.
>>>>
>>>>It depends.
>>>>
>>>>> > >> >Also, while the people in America who are rich generally got
>>>>> > >> >that way by making themselves useful, in Europe the rich got
>>>>> > >> >that way by robbing the peasants.
>>>>
>>>>I think that you need to factor slavery into the equation.
>>>>
>>>>> > >> People who don't have a knee-jerk "Ayn Rand is the Antichrist"
>>>>> > >> reaction might find the "Atlas Shrugged" movie to be of interest.
>>>>
>>>>Not the antichrist, but a huge hypocrit. In her later years, she lived
>>>>off of welfare.
>
>No, she lived off of Social Security, into which she had been paying
>ever since she first made a buck in the US. There is nothing
>"hypocritical" about someone who was forced by law to give money to
>the government to expect to get the service which the government
>promised in exchange for that money.

The last time I looked for a job (I got the one I retired from), I
didn't look for an income that would meet my expenses. I looked for an
income that would meet my expenses /divided by 0.7/ on the
perfectly-reasonable basis that 30% of the alleged amount would go for
taxes and other items that I had no control over. That 30% was, to me,
"funny money". Fussing over it does nothing useful.

>If she had had a choice not to give the money to the government and
>gave it to the government anyway, then she would be a hypocrite.

Also in prison, as tax evasion is a crime.

>>>>She also denied that her smoking had anything to do
>>>>with her lung cancer.
>
>Care to provide a quote on that point?

I seem to have a vague memory on that, but I may be confusing it with
Campbell's assertion that lung cancer causes smoking.

>>Difficult to find someone more stupid.
>
>So anyone who disagrees with you is "stupid"?
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 23:07:39 -0400, J. Clarke
<jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 02:40:01 -0700 (PDT), Quadibloc
><jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>>On Thursday, June 9, 2022 at 10:21:13 AM UTC-6, Paul S Person wrote:
>>
>>> Macron would be /so/ happy if he did, apparently.
>>
>>Now, now. Macron may even have a point. Humiliating someone with
>>his finger on a nuclear button could end badly.
>
>Remember that Macron has his finger on such a button.

Macron -- the Putin wannabe?
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Sat, 11 Jun 2022 09:26:19 -0700, Paul S Person
<psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

>On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 23:04:09 -0400, J. Clarke
><jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 8 Jun 2022 20:09:03 -0000 (UTC), Magewolf <Magewolf@nc.rr.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 08 Jun 2022 13:05:54 +0000, James Nicoll wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <t7pl46$bhd$1@gioia.aioe.org>,
>>>> Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) <helbig@asclothestro.multivax.de>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>In article <d8b004b7-b984-444b-bee8-451f3d1da495n@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> > >> >> Exactly. Economics is not a zero-sum game. The people who want
>>>>>> > >> >> to help the poor by pulling down the rich don't get that.
>>>>>
>>>>>It depends.
>>>>>
>>>>>> > >> >Also, while the people in America who are rich generally got
>>>>>> > >> >that way by making themselves useful, in Europe the rich got
>>>>>> > >> >that way by robbing the peasants.
>>>>>
>>>>>I think that you need to factor slavery into the equation.
>>>>>
>>>>>> > >> People who don't have a knee-jerk "Ayn Rand is the Antichrist"
>>>>>> > >> reaction might find the "Atlas Shrugged" movie to be of interest.
>>>>>
>>>>>Not the antichrist, but a huge hypocrit. In her later years, she lived
>>>>>off of welfare.
>>
>>No, she lived off of Social Security, into which she had been paying
>>ever since she first made a buck in the US. There is nothing
>>"hypocritical" about someone who was forced by law to give money to
>>the government to expect to get the service which the government
>>promised in exchange for that money.
>
>The last time I looked for a job (I got the one I retired from), I
>didn't look for an income that would meet my expenses. I looked for an
>income that would meet my expenses /divided by 0.7/ on the
>perfectly-reasonable basis that 30% of the alleged amount would go for
>taxes and other items that I had no control over. That 30% was, to me,
>"funny money". Fussing over it does nothing useful.
>
>>If she had had a choice not to give the money to the government and
>>gave it to the government anyway, then she would be a hypocrite.
>
>Also in prison, as tax evasion is a crime.

What part of "if she had the choice" are you having trouble with?

>>>>>She also denied that her smoking had anything to do
>>>>>with her lung cancer.
>>
>>Care to provide a quote on that point?
>
>I seem to have a vague memory on that, but I may be confusing it with
>Campbell's assertion that lung cancer causes smoking.
>
>>>Difficult to find someone more stupid.
>>
>>So anyone who disagrees with you is "stupid"?

On 2022-06-11 10:26 a.m., Paul S Person wrote:

>
>>>>> She also denied that her smoking had anything to do
>>>>> with her lung cancer.
>>
>> Care to provide a quote on that point?
>
> I seem to have a vague memory on that, but I may be confusing it with
> Campbell's assertion that lung cancer causes smoking.

My research indicates that Rand was a fervent advocate of smoking before
her cancer diagnosis, and just stopped talking about afterward, since
obviously Ayn Rand would never admit that she might have been wrong
about something.

On Monday, June 13, 2022 at 3:19:01 AM UTC-4, David Johnston wrote:
> On 2022-06-11 10:26 a.m., Paul S Person wrote:
>
> >
> >>>>> She also denied that her smoking had anything to do
> >>>>> with her lung cancer.
> >>
> >> Care to provide a quote on that point?
> >
> > I seem to have a vague memory on that, but I may be confusing it with
> > Campbell's assertion that lung cancer causes smoking.
> My research indicates that Rand was a fervent advocate of smoking before
> her cancer diagnosis, and just stopped talking about afterward, since
> obviously Ayn Rand would never admit that she might have been wrong
> about something.

I distinctly recall a passage in Atlas Shrugged where one of the characters
muses on smoking, and the symbolism of carrying fire with you. Of course,
cigarettes with gold '$' symbols are a clue in the plot.

pt

On 13/06/22 19:18, David Johnston wrote:

> My research indicates that Rand was a fervent advocate of smoking before
> her cancer diagnosis, and just stopped talking about afterward, since
> obviously Ayn Rand would never admit that she might have been wrong
> about something.
>

I have recently finished a reread of The Fountainhead which I did not
really understand when a teenager. I now understand her argument and am
not impressed. I found her characters and plot unrealistic and contrived
but her ridiculous excessive use of hyperbole kept me reading. There
were no gray areas; everything in this fairy tale was as black and white
as US propaganda with no possibility of the author being wrong about
anything.

Titus G wrote:
> David Johnston wrote:
>
>> My research indicates that Rand was a fervent advocate of smoking before
>> her cancer diagnosis, and just stopped talking about afterward, since
>> obviously Ayn Rand would never admit that she might have been wrong
>> about something.
>>
>
> I have recently finished a reread of The Fountainhead which I did not
> really understand when a teenager. I now understand her argument and am
> not impressed. I found her characters and plot unrealistic and contrived
> but her ridiculous excessive use of hyperbole kept me reading. There
> were no gray areas; everything in this fairy tale was as black and white
> as US propaganda with no possibility of the author being wrong about
> anything.

It's easy for me to shrug off, to laugh at, any Ayn Rand attempt to use
sophomoric philosophy to try to make me wrongthink. Rand's simply not
allowed to encroach upon my enjoyment of an _Atlas Shrugged_ audiobook
as art.
_Shrugged_ is the next audiobook indicated in my inflation induced
infatuation with the anarcho-libertarian genre. Although James recently
provided a welcome respite over the past weekend with _Frankenstein_
<https://jamesdavisnicoll.com/review/more-than-a-little-bit-crazy>.

Danke,

--
Don.......My cat's )\._.,--....,'``. https://crcomp.net/reviews.php
telltale tall tail /, _.. \ _\ (`._ ,.
tells tall tales.. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'

On Wed, 15 Jun 2022 15:01:48 +1200, Titus G <noone@nowhere.com> wrote:

>On 13/06/22 19:18, David Johnston wrote:
>
>> My research indicates that Rand was a fervent advocate of smoking before
>> her cancer diagnosis, and just stopped talking about afterward, since
>> obviously Ayn Rand would never admit that she might have been wrong
>> about something.
>>
>
>I have recently finished a reread of The Fountainhead which I did not
>really understand when a teenager. I now understand her argument and am
>not impressed. I found her characters and plot unrealistic and contrived
>but her ridiculous excessive use of hyperbole kept me reading. There
>were no gray areas; everything in this fairy tale was as black and white
>as US propaganda with no possibility of the author being wrong about
>anything.

Sounds about right.

As one reviewer (I think of the film noted), "Architecture critics do
not generally get to decide which buildings will be built".

I gave up on her /philosophy/ a long time ago. I am still deciding
when (or whether) to reread her /novels/.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

On Wed, 15 Jun 2022 05:15:45 -0000 (UTC), Don <g@crcomp.net> wrote:

>Titus G wrote:
>> David Johnston wrote:
>>
>>> My research indicates that Rand was a fervent advocate of smoking before
>>> her cancer diagnosis, and just stopped talking about afterward, since
>>> obviously Ayn Rand would never admit that she might have been wrong
>>> about something.
>>>
>>
>> I have recently finished a reread of The Fountainhead which I did not
>> really understand when a teenager. I now understand her argument and am
>> not impressed. I found her characters and plot unrealistic and contrived
>> but her ridiculous excessive use of hyperbole kept me reading. There
>> were no gray areas; everything in this fairy tale was as black and white
>> as US propaganda with no possibility of the author being wrong about
>> anything.
>
>It's easy for me to shrug off, to laugh at, any Ayn Rand attempt to use
>sophomoric philosophy to try to make me wrongthink. Rand's simply not
>allowed to encroach upon my enjoyment of an _Atlas Shrugged_ audiobook
>as art.
> _Shrugged_ is the next audiobook indicated in my inflation induced
>infatuation with the anarcho-libertarian genre. Although James recently
>provided a welcome respite over the past weekend with _Frankenstein_
><https://jamesdavisnicoll.com/review/more-than-a-little-bit-crazy>.

If this is your first time with /Atlas Shrugged/, be advised: it is
very long, and it has a 60 page explanation of her philosophy in it.
Which is about as enjoyable as might be expected.

But it was a good read, back in the day. It has a fair amount of
excitement and action in it as well.
--
"I begin to envy Petronius."
"I have envied him long since."

Paul wrote:
> Don wrote:
>>Titus G wrote:
>>> David Johnston wrote:
>>>
>>>> My research indicates that Rand was a fervent advocate of smoking before
>>>> her cancer diagnosis, and just stopped talking about afterward, since
>>>> obviously Ayn Rand would never admit that she might have been wrong
>>>> about something.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I have recently finished a reread of The Fountainhead which I did not
>>> really understand when a teenager. I now understand her argument and am
>>> not impressed. I found her characters and plot unrealistic and contrived
>>> but her ridiculous excessive use of hyperbole kept me reading. There
>>> were no gray areas; everything in this fairy tale was as black and white
>>> as US propaganda with no possibility of the author being wrong about
>>> anything.
>>
>>It's easy for me to shrug off, to laugh at, any Ayn Rand attempt to use
>>sophomoric philosophy to try to make me wrongthink. Rand's simply not
>>allowed to encroach upon my enjoyment of an _Atlas Shrugged_ audiobook
>>as art.
>> _Shrugged_ is the next audiobook indicated in my inflation induced
>>infatuation with the anarcho-libertarian genre. Although James recently
>>provided a welcome respite over the past weekend with _Frankenstein_
>><https://jamesdavisnicoll.com/review/more-than-a-little-bit-crazy>.
>
> If this is your first time with /Atlas Shrugged/, be advised: it is
> very long, and it has a 60 page explanation of her philosophy in it.
> Which is about as enjoyable as might be expected.
>
> But it was a good read, back in the day. It has a fair amount of
> excitement and action in it as well.

_Shrugged_'s been read by me before. It's easy for me to identify with
Randian heroes and hate her hyperbolized villains - evil people who beg
for redemptive violence until it's finally delivered to them.
Only it seems more like redemptive reality instead of violence. In
the end the bad guys get to live in a world they created - a world full
of false promises. A world long on talk and short on walk, so to speak.

Rand's not the only author to inject her own cigarette habit into her
characters. Those in the know say whenever Zelazny reached for a
cigarette in real life he had his characters do the same in his stories.
Nicotine increases neural activity. It makes its users smarter - at
the expense of their health. It's easy to deny nicotine's negative
health effects given how it boosts your intelligence.
You become Charlie in _Flowers for Algernon_, who gets smarter every
day. And no one in their right smart mind wants to be Charlie in
cognitive decline. It's easier to deny the inconvenient truth.

Danke,

--
Don.......My cat's )\._.,--....,'``. https://crcomp.net/reviews.php
telltale tall tail /, _.. \ _\ (`._ ,.
tells tall tales.. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'