Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Spiral Architect

Regulars
  • Content count

    907
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    30

Spiral Architect last won the day on May 14 2015

Spiral Architect had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About Spiral Architect

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Previous Fields

  • Country
    United States
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Michigan
  • Relationship status
    Married
  • Sexual orientation
    No Answer
  • Real Name
    Dan
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted
  • Biography/Intro
    I’m a regional safety manager in the trucking industry. I have worked from truck driver all the way up to vice president and currently starting over in a lerger portion of the industry. I’m a dedicated reader, passionate about ideas and music, plus I love to write.
  • Experience with Objectivism
    30 Year student of Objectivism. It's been a fun ride, much like my life, and I wouldn't change a thing.
  • Occupation
    Regional Safety Manager

Recent Profile Visitors

9157 profile views
  1. Immigration as related to loyalty

    I could have saved you a lot of work if you just said "huh? Double check your math." Because I did and realized I screwed up and reversed the numbers... Hey, I can admit an error. Reality is: 21 years ago: 35 cents = 1 peso so a 70 cent candy bar costs 2 pesos. Today: 5 cents equals = 1 peso so a 70 cent candy bar costs 14 pesos. So you are right, the peso is devalued extremely. I should actually have known better than to assume the Mexican Government wasn't debasing their currency worse than us. I just ran with your numbers as part of a larger point. To help you, it is worse than seven fold when you consider inflation on the dollar. But this still misses the point. OK, if we assume that large scale immigration is caused by a poor economy due to high inflation of the currency. Not sure that is really a thing here, we are not talking hyper-inflation, but for the sake of argument lets say that people are moving to America because the Mexican Government is debasing their currency. This a problem to be fixed by a better monetary policy, not a trade issue. Better trade deals will not stop anyone from printing wealth they do not have. Which is the point I failed to get across. Mass Migration is caused by the country people run from, not the country they run to.
  2. Greetings - Again!

    That is truly amazing and rocks. <-------- Adopted!
  3. Standard of Value - Life, Posterity, Legacy

    Hello, What an interesting ethical question. Since it is an abstract statement and no emergencies are given to justify an extreme either-or situation, my response is why is this an either-or situation? Live life to the fullest, create many values as you can, then when your life is coming to an end do the act that perpetuates it into the future. Building win-win situations starts with the self. But this an abstract answer. JASKN gave the better concrete answer. I'm just adding food for thought.
  4. Immigration as related to loyalty

    1. Pointing out that the Peso has improved 700% against the dollar does not support the idea that Mexico has devalued the Peso. If anything it is an argument for US devaluation of the dollar. Now if you want to argue that the US Fed is causing malinvestment and economic issues, that is a reasonable argument and in line with free economic policy. Stopping the Fed from dollar devaluation would fix a lot of issues beyond this discussion. 2. Corn is not an argument against trade, but subsidies. I agree that US subsidies policy causes malinvestment and the ripple effect is distorting our economy. But the issue is reducing Government intervention in the economy at home. 3. Mexico purses fiat money policy for the same reason all Governments, to avoid the integrity required by real reserves. All “workers” are poorer in every nation because printed money always benefits those who get it first (the banks) who have non-inflated purchasing power, and as it trickles down through the economy the last to get it suffer through the inflation and are poorer by the time any new printed money reaches them. This has nothing to do with trade and is an argument against fiat money. 4. I agree NAFTA should be renegotiated into a proper free-trade agreement, but that was neither stated nor is an issue with this discussion. In fact if we fixed everything you mention in your last post immigration would increase since we would have more wealth and jobs here and Mexico would still house the same criminal Government that makes the fundamentals of life, let alone thriving, untenable. 5. That is point: Corruption is that it is the real issue. It is a moral choice and a primary. Governments are not corrupt because of policy, but policies are corrupt because the thinking of statesmen is corrupt to criminal. People are not fleeing Mexico due to corn subsidies and trade agreements which pushed out a benign Government . They are fleeing to escape conditions that exist due to a criminal government that threatens their ability to live. Conditions created by the Mexican Government and perpetuated by that Government.
  5. Greetings - Again!

    Thank you! I'll come up with an image to try and help that
  6. I think the fundamental issue here as stated by another is equating sense perception with concept formation. Senses are proved by simply looking. It is basic awareness. What you see is what you see. It simply is. What you think can be right or wrong. Thinking requires work and choice. Civilization has spent 1000 of years overcoming errors of knowledge because we did not understand what we see. It doesn't make our senses invalid. It makes what we know invalid. We can fix the later and the purpose of science is to do just that. To link sense perception to understanding is to either claim to be blind because you can see, or claim blindness because you are fallible and learning requires work. I don't think you mean either so I hope this helps you think about it in a new way.
  7. Immigration as related to loyalty

    The reason Mexicans immigrates is: 1. The Mexican Government is corrupt to the point it makes Chicago Politics look like a Monte Python film, which is why their non-free economy is stagnate and quality of life in rural regions bad. If I lived in Mexico I would risk an American jail cell to get my family out, it is still an upgrade. 2. America has many generous public programs which is a problem with Welfare Policy and not immigration. Finally, the reason Americans choose to trade in Mexico is not foreign trade policy. When Communist China has lower Corporate Taxes (and Gains Tax) than us, and when Socialist Norway in more business friendly than us, the blame is not Free Trade across our borders. It is the lack of Free Trade within our borders.
  8. Immigration as related to loyalty

    I do not get why people are linking free trade or currency manipulation to immigration. Free trade allows people to freely associate and deal with each other without paying a fee to do so. Malinvestment is caused by tax policy, not the lack thereof. At best, for immigration the trend would be inversed. People in our country being allowed to freely associate with people in a poorer country incentivizes those people to stay there to continue to receive the benefits of future transactions. They would not move here to be ignored since businesses will be trading with those still in the cheaper homeland. I also do not see why debasing currency is relevant nor do we need proof. Corrupt governments use fiat currency by definition to circumvent objective standards in revenue generation or funding projects. But again a debased currency incentivized people to stay put if they benefit from an incoming currency that is better. So the only thing free trade and fiat currency schemes prove from an immigration standpoint is that it gives an incentive to Mexicans to stay put and receive the wealth the USA pours in. You would not move to America to be ignored by the same companies and have your purchasing power go down. Better to stay home and receive the better currency with better purchasing power.
  9. Greetings - Again!

    Reboot version 2.0. Been, years... Wow. Real life been a thing with family and work. In a much better place today and back to discuss ideas in a venue that actually appreciates discussing ideas. I like the changes. Nice clean look to things. Also good to see many familiar faces.
  10. Intellectual property

    Since I am not a patent expert this is merely an onion but I would say no one could patent an idea that is simply a riff on something already existing. That is why I said a spear is a bad example - By the time you get to an advanced society that has developed individual rights and has the need for species of property rights like IP simple designs are common (like forks). A fork was new in an age when the concept was not applicable. Today any interchange of parts is just playing with the same public domain material. You'd have to invent a sonic fork or an infrared knife for it to be considered. OK, now I want the Stake Saber 2000 that looks like a Jedi light saber. It would be like taking something that is public domain, like the Star Spangled Banner, adding a few blast beats, then claiming it new IP. It's just not going to happen. Now if you want to talk implementation that is a separate thing and an interesting conversation into itself. Where do you draw the line on IP.
  11. Intellectual property

    But he did have the patent and was allowed to benefit first I fully expect that at some point the intellectual patent will run out and the same thing would happen.
  12. Intellectual property

    First - A spear is a poor example since no one would IP something so fundamentally simple and common place in an advanced society necessary for property rights in the first place. I know I started this example but that was to demonstrate why scarcity was not an issue - So I will apologize for setting up such a bad example. What we are talking about is IP. This requires a proper context of an advance society that has the need to demarcate different types of property rights into subcategories to protect people. A savage is still trying to discover fire and principles, let alone political rights or something advanced like IP. So here is a better example in context of mondern society: If I spend 10 years creating a new kind of medicine to cure a disease then I want a return on my 10 years. If someone takes my medicine then makes their own copies and sells it then yes, he has deprived of the ROI for my ten years. This doesn't even bring up the money I spent also to do this. I might as well just worked an easier job and saved my money. Just because I can still sell the medicine for lower amounts and quantities while others cash in on my 10 years of labor does not change the fact I'm being robbed of my effort. Worse, I have no incentive to do such an effort while I wait for someone else to do the intellectual lifting. Now the world is robbed of the knowledge in the long run. I would not tell them that cannot learn from my example. But I would charge them for it and give Mrs. Architect the vacation she deserves since she had to put up with me for those ten years Also, remember, statue of limitations will eventually run out and people will still get access to this via public domain. IP involves complicated approval like all patents and copyrights and has limited applicability. Unless you have access to a mixed economy where the mouse can get it pushed out but that is a different thread. Does this help make things clear?
  13. Intellectual property

    Exactly! Now to bring this home, the essential factor is that I created it for my use. What it is does not matter. Only the fact I created it. It has value because of me. How it works in reality is really irrelevant at this point. To put it negatively, what it is or what others may think of it are not important. There is another science that deals with that.
  14. Intellectual property

    I know you're not talking about trade - I keep having to go back to it since you bring in an economic concept known as scarcity. I take issue with the whole tribal concept of IP as communal property and specifically you are using an economic concept to justify making this particular species of property communal. If it is that distracting however I'll delimit that point since I do not want to distract from the real point. Property as a moral concept.
  15. Intellectual property

    I am having copy/paste issue so I will just reiterate a comment from earlier that basically said you have taken nothing from a man if he invents a spear because the man can still use the spear. If I spend years inventing something new then yes - You have deprived me on the ROI for my time and money I spent inventing it. I have no reason to spend my life inventing something if it becomes communal property and I do not get a return for my time. This is the point. Just as taking someone's property is depriving them of the time they spent earning the object, so it taking a man's ideas depriving him of the time he spent earning them. Unless we are going to advocate the spiritual equivalent of to each his own ability to each his own need, if I am going to spend my time creating something I jolly well want to enjoy the full unbridled benefit of my time and sweat in doing what only I could have done.
×