Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

airborne

Regulars
  • Posts

    134
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by airborne

  1. I have been drawn to service since a young age. I'm talking about service in the Israeli army. I was born there, and came back to live there for a year last year. Its far from perfect and I have many problems with the way things are run in that country... But I have to come to a decision soon. I've already started studying a year diploma, which I plan to complete in another few months. The problem for me is that I have a passion for trading, which I've been doing for 3 years. Right now, I have a massive edge over anyone else my age wanting to get into the industry(I've already had interviews at trading firms and hedge funds, some talking about starting me off with 100k to manage but it never eventuated). If I join the army this edge will no longer be present, nor will I be a millionaire. It is not going to ruin my prospects, but it will mean that I have to delay my success and my millions for a few more years. And this is in addition to the fact that I can get kidnapped, killed or badly injured. Still though its in my head and I cant get it out. I've continually written on a piece of paper the benefit vs the rewards and the rewards - and the risks seem to outweigh them - which doesn't help. What else can I ask myself? I have a split urge on both sides, one strongly draws me to service, and the other to just continue trading. What is the best approach when having to make such decisions? I don't want to dismiss my "emotion" because I know I have made some great and correct decisions based on them as well(my logic was faulty, but my decisions off emotions were right). Help!? lol
  2. There have been cases where people have been prosecuted for tax avoidance. But it depends on whether a violation occurred against the "spirit of the law". A quick search returned me to a 2004 case where the "High Court upheld 5-0 an appeal by the tax office against a Canberra couple, the Harts, who split a home loan to claim big tax deductions on their investment property." and some press releases by the ATO(Australian Tax) warning anyone selling aggressive tax-planning schemes that they can be prosecuted. Some special cases are beyond the grasp of "spirit of the law" violations, e.g. certain strategies used by fund managers managing forced superannuation(this is like your IRA or 401k I think) contributions etc. The focus of my subject isn't law so I cant delve into it to deeply,,,
  3. Hi, so I started studying financial markets, financial law etc. One thing that has been frustrating me so much lately is the term "spirit". Right now I'm reading about tax avoidance and tax evasion and the definition given for tax avoidance is "It interprets the letter[what is written?] rather than the spirit of the law, and uses techniques that are contrived..." This is just bullshit!!!! it is a setup for decisions made by whim. This means if I give most of my taxable income to charity(if its authorized by bureaucrats its tax deductible) they can take me to court for tax avoidance if they feel like it... whatever goes. And this is not the only subjective BS I see, its everywhere and every time I see it I get pissed off.
  4. I was thinking in this direction. Prisoner is convicted of murder. Proof is certain. Prison can offer up convicted prisoner to medical companies needing human subjects for experiments, in turn receiving funding from the medical company. The intention of this is not punishment, but medical use of someone with no right to life - if it is needed.
  5. Since murderers forfeit their right to life would it be considered immoral to use them for medical experiments? I believe it wouldn't - although I really don't like the sound of it, I feel it is wrong - just as an animal has no right to life, and can be used for medical experiments so can a murderer who has forfeited his right to life. The only question that comes up here links into capital punishment, which is.. does the evidence certainly prove that he is in fact the murderer. Have I gone wrong in my thinking somewhere or is this possible, ethically and politically, in an Objectivist society?
  6. and it is also lifting income for Chinese people...
  7. cheers, its coming my way soon... =) love amazon
  8. I just got onto the topic of circular flow of income and expenditures. In the case of an export boom, spending, investments, imports would increase right? ...also tax income for govt. So in todays world this would mean the government would see this as "inflation" or a "major current account deficit" and need to start increasing interest rates or some other policy to reduce "inflation"? something like this?
  9. So this concept of permanent unemployment is possible in a mixed economy? and I still don't get why this matters. Even IF everyone is employed aren't new ideas developed? I'm just learning my texts and getting more and more confused. Why do they insist on calling all price increase inflation and then doing something about it through reserve bank policymakers!? Also I noticed printing money out of thin air is called "injecting liquidity", apart from making everything more expensive what does this actually achieve?
  10. One of my current subjects is "financial market economics" - anyway, there are so many things in this subject which just seem... wrong. So if you guys could help me out, it would be much appreciated. ... OK. Now my first problem with this is "full capacity", what exactly is "full capacity". Is this implying that human capital has a "full capacity" to its productivity? Whoa, now this is quite a jump. So this demand growth can never be met? and inflation will last forever?
  11. I just had a further realization and why my thinking was wrong. Especially after reading VOS on the altruistic ethics on non-reality based situations, as some of you may have intended to point out. Look, I was thinking of a type of scenario where %100 death was imminent, some non-existent scenario. However, if I think about family/very close friends in the context of reality, I could die to save them. *could*. If some guy aims a gun at someone I love, in that moment there is still the hope that I will come out alive and my friend too, and I guess that is what makes it worth it. It is the hope of both of us being alive that drives me.
  12. I'm still trying to get my head around this - thanks all for your input So the difference between would and could die for you - Would means, I would choose to die instead of you if I was presented with the choice Could means, It is possible that under certain circumstances I will risk my life to save yours that could lead to my death Is that what this means? As Mark K. pointed out Life is mans highest value. So for someone to die for someone else they would have to be their highest value?(Isn't this second-handedness?)
  13. If she is told, hopefully she will not react like this:
  14. I agree, it would probably be your reaction to do everything you can to save someone you love. However, if I rationally think out the situation then logic tells me not to save anyone close to me for the reason that most people who say they would die for someone don't kill themselves after that someone dies. Basically, its possible that you will find a reason to live(like Ayn Rand did). Isn't that better than not being alive at all? Wouldn't that be in your self-interest? FeatherFall: Self-respect is a matter of acting in your own rational self-interest, which is what I'm trying to understand in relation to these situations.
  15. I do, I feel excited at the prospect of achieving something and of telling people. In the case that I wouldn't get approval I wouldn't tell people(but there are always one or two people who have aligned interests so you can impress them).. and I'll add what I was so excited about so I can boast to worthy people =) I'm in the process of landing a trader position at a hedge fund. Initially, I would begin by managing a "trial capital" larger than what both my parents make put together in almost two years(so alot)... unfortunately this is not guaranteed yet, but I've had a long interviews and another coming follow-up to decide.
  16. I think I have a slight second handed nature. I wrote up my values but the desire to be great in others eyes didn't come up. Lots of the things I've done also had nothing to do with other people. However, whenever I succeed in a goal I have this tendency to want to blurt it out and tell everyone(well moreso my friends, I'm not one of those crazy boasters), to show them how great I am. It doesn't go in so far that I lie about my achievements but still, this concerns me. Should it? I cant imagine Howard Roark telling everyone how great he is, Dagny, Rearden, Francisco, Galt(he didn't care that the world didn't know he invented a new form of energy). On the other hand when I achieve something great(seriously great) I want everyone to know. Again, when doing introspection this never showed up on my values(other people knowing that I am great).
  17. Initially the idea that saving a loved one at your own life's expensive made sense to me. Now it does not. (VOS - pg 52) There are many people who loose a loved one but still live. Life is not so unbearable that they commit suicide. If you decide not to save a loved one at your own life's expense the scenario could unfold in two ways. 1. You can not bear to live, so you commit suicide 2. You struggle at first but then find a reason to live This is way better than just killing yourself to save a loved one because you think you couldn't live without them. I remember on one of the Ayn Rand interviews on you tube(was it with Mike Wallace) that she said she would jump in front of a bullet to save her husbands life(this is after he had already died). If she coulden't bear to live without him why didn't she commit suicide? Did she suddenly find a reason to live? Doesn't that contradict her idea that she couldn't live without him so would be willing to trade her life for his survival?
  18. Anyone know what happened? http://www.balph.net/itoe/ takes me to some random junk site. I just started reading ITOE, any other resources as the one above?
  19. This could be related... but I've almost always hated subjects taught at school. When I did enjoy learning it was from smart people/ books. Hackers, professional traders, entrepreneurs.. topics ranging from trading -> programming -> philosophy have interested me at one point or another but NEVER at school because frankly they were boring, sucked and completely irrelevant to my life. I remember one of the novels we read for english in high school, I forgot its name but I hated it. Anyway it was about a terrorist called Milo and how he came from poverty so his only life option was terrorism, it builds up a sympathy with the terrorists and also introduces the American characters. What I do remember is having a discussion for many lessons about how people are born into it and have no choice and you can't know if someone is really a terrorist or a freedom fighter.
  20. Isn't everyones ultimate purpose in life the same - happiness(if they're rational)? I know I have means values to get to means ends(love/romance, excitement, happiness, security... which all fall under happiness), but I don't have any "ultimate purpose". living life as man qua man is an ultimate purpose?
  21. When I saw this I immediately thought of my prudent predator problem. I don't see how it would be in your self-interest not to buy stolen goods there under the "official" authority of the government, that is: if the item you want is cheap and hard to get elsewhere.
  22. - Victor Sperandeo in Methods of A Wall Street Master Isn't it worse to replace self-limiting beliefs with wrong beliefs? I don't believe all the above "beliefs" are true. How do I discover what is actually true and then set the best beliefs? Also how do you determine if you have a "self-limiting" belief? I have some beliefs that *could* be considered that, just an e.g. I'm not smart/rich enough. But how do I know this isn't a valid belief? Also in setting means values, what is a rational target? Initially all my means values were set to ambitious figures. e.g. $100million or $7billion but now I'm told that this would be counter-productive to my happiness - which sort of seems valid its just I don't know what other method of rational targets I could use which would still keep me ambitious. FYI Sperandeo is an Objectivist. His first firm was called "Ragnar Options".
  23. I read something that got me thinking... (Victor Sperandeo - Methods of A Wall Street Master) If wrong ideas have infiltrated the teaching of philosophy and economics, what else have they reached? It would seem that number-based subjects would be the only safe courses(e.g. maths, physics, engineering).
×
×
  • Create New...