Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Ninth Doctor

Regulars
  • Content Count

    1004
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    21

Ninth Doctor last won the day on August 22

Ninth Doctor had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About Ninth Doctor

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Previous Fields

  • Country
    United States
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Florida
  • Relationship status
    No Answer
  • Sexual orientation
    No Answer
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. He (She?) also wrote "So while I’m in, I’m not sure I’m in enough. This may warrant a greater risk. If the company achieves its goal of getting relisted and returns to its pre-bankruptcy prices, I could make 100x." The thread title asks about going "all-in". That's what I was addressing. Common advice, as you say.
  2. Why go "all in"? Throw some play money at it, no more. If it goes up 100X, then you turn $1K into $100K. Not bad at all. Personally, I've never gotten a penny stock tip that turned into anything but a loss.
  3. I have a feeling it was this: When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion–when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing–when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors–when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you–when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice–you may know that your society is doomed. https://www.cato.org/blog/ayn-rand-front-page-ecu
  4. Nope. He worked in South Africa? That's your beat. But it does call to mind a quote from Muhammad Ali: "Champ, what did you think of Africa?" Ali replied, "Thank God my granddaddy got on that boat!" That won't score any points with the likes of Fraser. Rand's essay "Racism" in The Virtue of Selfishness surely bears reviewing in this context. Though I haven't reread it in years.
  5. If you've never encountered this piece before, I can't recommend it highly enough. Particularly the part about how the UK (and if you'll allow, by extension, capitalism) ended slavery. Which is different from racism...though probably not from Fraser's perspective.
  6. Mark, I think there's an error in your piece. Peikoff urged voting Democratic in 2006, not 2004. https://web.archive.org/web/20061102065824/http://www.peikoff.com/ It was hotly debated at the time. I'm not aware of an equivalent statement from 2004. He did, however, urge voting against Bush in 1992. Following the election of Obama we all got a good reminder of what can happen when Democrats are in power. Clinton was pretty bad too, but he never had a filibuster-proof majority as Obama (briefly) did. Imagine the current crop of Democrats with that much power.
  7. He (Timpa) was already cuffed (with legs bound too) when they started laughing. The $20 bill is in the custody of the police. Was Floyd a counterfeiter, or did he just happen to get passed a counterfeit bill and he was in turn passing it on? Knowingly or not? Don't know. "Forget that he was black"? The protests arising from this case (Floyd) are certainly about race, not authoritarianism in general. It is evolving such that now there's a call to "defund the police", and that sounds anti-authoritarian I'll grant. Are you disputing that the protests are primarily about race? F
  8. This story seems to be gaining traction: https://www.dallasnews.com/news/investigations/2019/08/02/police-responded-to-his-911-call-for-help-he-died-what-happened-to-tony-timpa/ It came to my attention under the headline “White privilege didn’t save Tony Timpa”. Differences to the Floyd case: 1. The decedent was white 2. The cops laughed while restraining/killing him 3. 14 minutes vs. 9 minutes 4. He was on coke (Floyd was on Meth & Fentanyl) 5. The video didn’t become available immediately There’s no evidence (yet) that the Minne
  9. Epicurus was born 18-19 years before Aristotle's death. Nice essay. What's the ETA on your book?
  10. How did you adjust the data for all the varying situations? Example: you can't (shouldn't) count William Henry Harrison as a one term president, since he died in office and thus didn't have an opportunity to be a two term president. Did you count Teddy Roosevelt as a two termer? He was only elected once. Truman and LBJ too. Improved longevity is probably all you can take away from this. And maybe fewer assassinations.
  11. I believe this book was produced to answer your request: https://www.amazon.com/John-Galt-Innovators-Villainous-Destroying/dp/1511384468 I must confess I have not read it.
  12. Hey Mark, here’s an analogy for you: Carl Barney is the Werner von Braun of Objectivism. This likens Scientology to Nazism and Objectivism to the NASA of the moon landing. See the American flag here: You have to thank this guy: Sure, you have strongly negative feelings towards ARI, so you’ll object, but, there’s icing on the cake: this makes you the Tom Lehrer of Objectivism. Not so bad, eh?
  13. For example, if you're coming to this from a religious background, in other words you're grappling with the challenge to belief in god, try Atheism: The Case Against God by George H. Smith. It's written from an Objectivist perspective, and is a great book.
  14. Dollars to donuts Dupin is Mark from ARI Watch. Trying to drum up interest in his piece attacking Carl Barney. There was some discussion of it recently on OL: https://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/topic/17234-barney-tells-his-story/ My comment from over there: In earlier discussions I came out as a Barney defender, since I felt Mark's attacks had a lot of unfairness in them. But I don't have the time or energy for a rehash. It's out there on older threads, and it looks like Biddle is covering the rebuttals well enough. A sample: First, to criticize a private college
  15. This reads like something out of the Pick-up Artist literature. You ought to spend some time studying it. By rejecting her you made yourself irresistible, then when you became clingy, you were no longer a challenge for her. Your rejection went against her self-image as an attractive woman who can get any man she wants, so she had to get you to validate herself. After, rejecting you gets her even more self-validation, plus (maybe) a bit of payback. I don’t think it’s a dynamic that will ever result in a healthy relationship, so you need to write this one off.
×
×
  • Create New...