Sergeant343

How many of you out there watch the first episode of the new history channel's documentary "The Men Who Built America," for I found it to be really good and it did a good job presenting them as non-biased as possible. I believe the next episode is the 23rd of this month.

There is a reason I said basically. When I said, "basically all politicians in Washington," I was speaking about majority of them, not all of them.

Someone who believes one thing one day, then sees popular opinion change, and changes his opinion to put himself in a better position. Basically every politician in Washington.

I think it'll be fair to say that punishments are temporary and penalties are "permanent"

In other words people who flip flop to popular consensus?

I don't see anything wrong about going green, for I think it is the next step in the evolution of energy and doing so is selfish if you live in cities and want better air quality for yourself or to save money at the pump. However, people like 10:10 who want to use governmental force to make the market turn in their favor are immoral and irrational for thinking that would work, for if it does happen it should be done through free market forces, which is something these leftists fail to understand.

I know I have to think for myself, which is why I believed that to begin with, but since the posters made much better arguments for the stock market and they made more rational sense to me than my first statement, and I won't stick to something that has be proven to me to be irrational. Economics won't being in my job field, so I won't become completely knowledgeable of its inner workings, but I want to learn more, or otherwise remain ignorant.

Or it could be a reference to the Greek god Atlas, many different interpretations can be made.

It ends when they are either kicked out of the house, or when they become self-sufficient if that is capable, if not then when they move out without assistance. Some parents do it for life because they value their children so much and that is acceptable. The short answer is, it depends on the parents.

It was pointed out again that I jumped to an irrational conclusion. In fact I am now going to say that in the opening topic now.

As said later on in this thread, my objection was government interference the entire time.

I think you're right, maybe I did come to the wrong decision. I honestly didn't expect coming out thinking differently, but it seems like I mistakenly took a collectivist stance, without even knowing it even though I hate class warfare and I'm in the under $50000 range(family not me). I may be thinking ideally about an objectivist society, but with the libertarian islands being built, perhaps an Objectivist society is not far behind.

Bingo you got me yes there is nothing wrong with someone choosing to make their company public, though I wouldn't, but I could change that view since I am still only a child(20). Maybe I jumped to a big conclusion about the stock market and it would work in an objectivist society, but even if the initiation of force was taken away, since not everyone that owns corps are objectivists they will find a way to get their parasitic way, maybe I'm being too cynical, but that is just what I think will happen.

It went from rational self interest to irrational self interest. That is what I am assuming it was once with the books the users are recommending me, not to mention the fact of corporate bribes to the government and the government getting involved with the corps, by passing laws and regulations to help them out.

I never have been good at explaining things, so I'll try my best. I guess you could say I hate what the stock market has become and I prefer capitalism to corporate capitalism(corporatism). I could see something like the stock market working if everyone was rational and reasonable. I also don't like how our currency is tied to what the stocks are, but maybe that comes from a lack of understanding on my part. I hope this explains it better for you.

Perhaps I am, so I apologize for that, also can't a person chose to be publicly owned, I may disagree with public ownership, but others don't and can't it work without a stock market.

No I do not view capitalists as such since all of our innovations have come from those who changed industry and the collectivist would never allow since things to exist with the regulations they wish and companies worked fine without the stock market before and I believe it can still. If I sound like I want it to be law I'm sorry. I am attempting to say there should be no stock market, but if someone wishes to share their company for whatever reason they can, but they can do it without the stock market. I know that they own it and they can do what they wish as a group, but I still prefer single ownership to group.

True many do retain, but why should anything be publicly owned other than local courts, local police, and a small armed forces?

Am I alone in thinking that the Stock Market is immoral and irrational? The reason I believe it is, is because a company should grow as far as it can by the individual instead of a group that makes money for doing nothing and allowing a company to grow only if they feel like it. The group can also make the creator of the company leave if he doesn't bow down to their will.