Mammon

I figured my only reply to this was going to start a larger discussion, so I made a another thread because this thread is musing about the future. Feel free to merge them if you think that's better. (or delete it because that's the usually course of action)

Simple question. I'll start with this -- Who is better than Barack Obama? I'm going to be purely Socratic in this thread. I'm usually always Socratic but, no one's caught on to that so I'm going to come out and say it this time.

I wonder how close this brings us to Thomas Sowell's prediction?

As a side-note, I looked this up and found major bondholders can sit on the board of directors for representation. I don't know how much power they actually have though. Interesting.

And that's exactly what we don't want. Anyways, thanks for the posts. I'm going on vacation so I'm jetting out of here in a few minutes. I'll try to talk about it more when I get back.

I read through that a few times and something occurred to me. Since when did loaners have so much power? If I buy a lot of bonds of a company I don't have any managerial clout at all. At least I've never heard of anything like that. Banks even don't give orders to people when they make loans. They usually just demand to get the money you own them, they don't tell you how to spend it and when to spend it. That's an equity issue. It just looks to me like the government is treating it's debt like its equity. Do any sources on those? It's not that I don't believe you, it's that I don't believe this entire situation. Then again, a lot of crazy things have been happening lately. Edit: I've always understood that the banks were controlled by the government to a certain extent, but what I find unbelievable is talks of out right, shameless nationalization. It's something I don't want to take lightly.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/rbssFinancia...0090220?sp=true This is the first time I've heard about this. I've been out of the loop lately so I don't know how long this information has been out there, does anyone know where this is coming from? I saw on the front page of OO.net that Alan Greenspan said something about it in the Financial Times. Is that true? Basically, I'm wondering if this is speculation or if it's been officially proposed or not. Does anyone know? Edit: I saw yesterday that Venezuela nationalized a bank, I expect such from them, but not from America. If these types of fears hover around it could lead to the same thing that happened during the Great Depression, which is a lack of people participating in the economy because of a fear of nationalization.

I was raised Baptist. We were taught to have casual conversations with the creator of all existence. If that doesn't speak volumes...

Does everyone have a favorite beer? I recently discovered mine -- Stella Artois. I could probably live off that stuff. Most other beers taste like carbonated-piss-water.

Could they even be consider Objectivists since Objectivism is something Rand started and said aliens would of made it up on their own?

Also, Objectivist intellectuals seem solely focused on talking to Objectivists. Or at least thats who seems to only pay attention to. I just think there is a lot of preaching to the choir going on.

People who listen to Gordan Liddy and Rush Limbaugh aren't people I'd focus on trying to persuade of anything. People who call Ayn Rand a secular progressive aren't worth anything. I didn't say an Objectivist intellectual refused an invitation to speak at Davos, I asked why I haven't heard or seen anything that shows Objectivist intellectuals made any effort to even go to Davos. That's why I asked "or did they?" which no one answered so, until proven otherwise, no one knows. If nothing else it would be nice to see them make a goal of trying to get a speaking position at Davos or a big WEF event. Of course they go to where they are invited, but that's why I think they should try to get invited to a place where their audience actually matters in this world.

That's a really good point actually.

You're a BG fan too?

I'm not really feeling it.

Did he have a birthday cake with bullets on it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iWQR36dW0GA I like this video, I think it's surprisingly artistic. It's also weird how you can do something like this, and put it online. What a flat world.

Do you have any examples of his "heavy-handed religiosity"?

I'm going to skip 21 minutes and take your word for it. I still hold my conviction that all bizarre sexual fetishes are psychological. Either straight disorders or something just doesn't click right up there or it's something in your life that holds a different meaning/value and you turn that into a sexual one.

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSB394510 I think these guys have a show on Discovery Channel. I think they are clearly eco-terrorists. I mean, they seek to disrupt peoples activities through scare tactics and intimidation like normal terrorists. Yet they get a lot of positive coverage. I think it encourages others to follow suit.

On this particular issue, I think people deserve to be offended.

I meant Muslims in space. But, come to think of it, it could go either way you described. Edit: I should say Iranians in space because not all Muslims are Tuskan-minded.

This will only lead too...

The Pledge commercials are a little creepy. But, seriously, it's a bunch of celebrities. They say this kind of crap all the time, I don't ever take a word of it seriously. If we actually something like actual cults popping up, I'll be more convinced. I kind of like the treatment Obama is getting, actually.

Just take the money. When your in college you need all the help you can get. They give away so much money because they know they are going to get it back from you, voluntarily or not. I don't consider it mooching. Plus, even if I was wealthy and paid millions in taxes I'd rather my taxes go to sending guys like you and I through college then sending bums to liquor stores or single-mothers to the bread line. That doesn't mean I like it or think it's right, obviously. But, we can try to scrap by with some value actually created here, or a higher chance of that happening.