Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

therights

Regulars
  • Posts

    21
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    therights reacted to Atlas- in Would and objectivist be ok with this?   
    If an employer runs his comapny like that it will never truly succed. If you look at all the great industrys and buisness's they all our founded on great minds. A mind can olny show it's greatness if it is allowed to work free of constraint. If an employer expects you to do what he says just because he "told you to" without any reason then any men of intelligence will quickly leave him behind.
  2. Like
    therights reacted to Greebo in Would and objectivist be ok with this?   
    Yes, he's technically right - it's his company, and he can run it like he wants.

    But he doesn't own you, as you seem to know - and if he's so foolish as to consider simple ownership as being akin to having all the knowledge and skills necessary to succeed as an owner, then well - I think it was Andrew Carnegie who said something about not being smart so much as being able to hire smart people.

    His loss.
  3. Like
    therights got a reaction from ttime in Would and objectivist be ok with this?   
    Hello,

    Thanks for your advice here. It is pretty much in line with my own thoughts and feelings and I am now starting to seek employment. I tried to be as objective as possible with my description so it didn't appear like I was only putting across my side of the argument.

    Basically he wants me to sell something that will cost £2000.00 to tell a client what I already know. He needs to spend a great deal more to make his business work.

    When I pulled my director in to the meeting after the disagreement I asked him not to speak to me in the way he did, especially not in front of people. He basically replied and told me that when he says the argument is over, then it's over. I said I can work like that. He replied until such times you pay for yourself then you don't have a say. I asked him what that meant. He replied 'until you own your own company'.

    Upon reflection - I think I'll leave.
  4. Like
    therights reacted to Atlas- in individual rights are not subject to a public vote or are they?   
    Rights exist to protect the minority from the majority and the individual is the smalest minority on earth. As such individual rights can never be subject to public vote as that is violating the very premises of them. If they can be taken away a right is not a right it is a liberty. When someone is sentanced their rights are not violated unless it is the death penalty, as all they are doing is paying back what they unrightfuly took.

    On the subject of jurys. I can't see how it is that 12 randomly picked men and women who know nothing about law can possibly make such descions. In a case recently a jurer told the court she was threatened by the defnedant. This was a complete lie that she concuted to be able to go home. She got three years. How does this person get to decided whether one man murdered another.
  5. Like
    therights reacted to Chris.S in Objectivism and circumcision?   
    A child is not a tree on your property to prune as you please. Just because your parents chopped your branch and you like it doesn't give you the right to chop your sons branch for any reason other than a real danger to his health.

    I was raised Catholic and my wife Islamic, but both of us are saner now than to try and harm any future children for the sake of aesthetics, or tradition, or cleanliness, and I think doing so nowadays means the parents have thrown all thought in the garbage along with the foreskin.
  6. Like
    therights reacted to slacker00 in Objectivism and circumcision?   
    What does Objectivism say about circumcision?

    I know Rand never mentioned it, specifically, unless I somehow missed it. But there should still be some interpretations or guidelines with respect to reality, rationality, rights, etc, which can help guide this decision.

    Personally, I think it's disgusting. It's religious barbarianism meant to cut man down. It's a violation of rights. It's a sin against the greatness of man to mutilate his body in a way which may humble him until he dies.

    If I may say so, I hope if anyone here has a male (or female) child, they will not follow these religious traditions and end this crime against man's ego. Thank you.
  7. Like
    therights reacted to softwareNerd in Did capitalism caused the UK Financial Crisis   
    The essential function of the central bank is to be a "lender of last resort". This means that when another bank needs cash, that other bank can give the central bank some assets as security and the central bank will give it cash. The central bank also puts restrictions on banks: for instance, it may tell banks they must keep a cash reserve of (say) 10% of total deposits, or that they must not make a new-car loan for more than 90% of the sale price, and so on. The rationale is this: since the central bank is back-stopping the other banks, the central banks gets to lay down some rules of riskiness and banks have to stick by those rules.
    In theory, one could have a central bank that forces banks to play by ultra-safe standards. However, that is not how populist governments work. Invariably, the standards are lowered. This puts banks in something of a quandary. Without a central bank, a banker has to think about solvency and liquidity. it would be risky for him to let his cash reserve go below a certain %; it would be risky for him not to give a certain % of short-term loans which he can call in quickly. However, when the central bank allows lower standards and says it will print as much money as needed to tide over any liquidity crisis, then it no longer becomes prudent for a banker to keep such high standards. One can generalize this story to other spheres of life, where people do less for themselves when they know someone else is looking out for them.



  8. Like
    therights reacted to DanLane in Did capitalism caused the UK Financial Crisis   
    Greed is a motivation, not an action. It can, at most, be the secondary cause of something. It is defined as the willingness to disregard your own system of morality and take massive losses or commit crimes in order to gain something of little actual value. The "Because Greed" arguement is that capitalism brings out the oh so evil human nature in the best of us, and causes us to uncontrollably steal from or defraud others in a way which ordinary laws are somehow unable to prevent. Therefore we need to be brought under more creative forms of control to save us from ourselves. There is no need to present evidence of wrongdoing if the motive of the suspect's unidentified actions is enough to convict him of anything, and a pointed finger is enough to prove said motive.

    Why is greed only for money and never for power?
    Why can the greed of some only be restrained by the endless awarding of power to others?
    Why are the greedy jews the greedy businessmen so prone to greed while the lawmakers and the majority of voters are not?

    Why is it greedy to trade willingly for money, less greedy to tax or take it by force, less greedy still to sell it for some third party's political support, and not greedy at all to beg for it in exchange for someone else's blood?


    "Because Greed" is an empty appeal to emotion relying on the target's implicit hatred and misidentification of human nature (works particularly well on the religious). The hope is that the target will project this view onto a scapegoat and will forget to ask what crimes have actually been comitted and who stands to benefit from the proposed retribution.
  9. Like
    therights reacted to Tyco in Did capitalism caused the UK Financial Crisis   
    Interesting fact I heard the other day: the total cost of the bailout given to the banks in 2008/9, at most could be valued at about £700 million.

    That's less than the tax revenue from 'the city' (London's financial sector) in 2007 alone.

    Note that I haven't verified this claim. Thought it was a perspective we rarely hear on the news, though.
×
×
  • Create New...