Frederic

I've been involved lately in some pretty heated discussions with my brother (who's quite liberal) about health care. I know this information may be found somewhere else in this forum but I was not able to find it. So help me if you can! We're Canadians. We were discussion health care and I was telling him why "universal health care" and why I believe there shouldn't be any form of compulsory "free" health care. I've felt that way all my life even before discovering Objectivism, although for different reasons at the time. Here are some questions: 1) Look at what's happening in the US. Lots of people cannot afford their own health insurance and when they do, they are rarely able to get the treatment they paid for. Insurance companies are trying to avoid paying for the right treatment, it's a big mess, etc.... therefore a free market system of health care (fully private) cannot work. MY ANSWER: I'm not fully aware of how things work in the US. But in principles there shouldn't be any form of compulsory universal health care. I am not responsible for paying for everyone else, especially by force (through taxes). Our current system leads to lots of abuse anyway, because everyone is hoping to take advantage of it, going to the doctor for every cough. I believe everyone is responsible for their own lives. If the insurance-based US system doesn't work, it seems to me that the system may be at fault — not the principle behind it. Any comments? I lack information about why the US system is not "working". I have not watched the movie "Sicko" and don't intend to... 2) What will you do with people who just can't afford to pay health insurance? Will you just say "too bad, but you'll have to die." MY ANSWER: In a free society nothing will prevent you from helping them. Private charities can be used to help the very poor and unfortunate. The only difference is that it's done voluntarily, not by force. 3) Such a charity/voluntary system cannot work. Nobody would pay for it if they weren't forced to. MY ANSWER: Human nature is naturally generous, and it doesn't have to be inforced by law. If you think that men are "wolves to men" then the fundamental view is that we're essentially evil and we need a government to control us. I don't believe that. People would give voluntarily to help the unfortunate, especially if they were allowed to keep the 50% that the government currently steals from them every year through taxes. Any comments would be appreciated, especially to understand the US system and how to explain its problems and how these problems could be solved in a free society.

Sometimes I dread checking out this forum to find infuriating stuff like that. I don't watch TV (except for movies and some TV shows without ads), and I haven't for years. Ayn Rand said in a live interviews "Universities are one of the most dangerous places in the United States." They are the ones teaching the collectivist mindset. One of the best decisions of my life was to NOT go to University and start my own business instead...

If you wish to have in-depth reviews on the direction of world economy, where to invest your money, I recommend subscribing to International Speculator by Casey Research Group. You can find them on the web. They recently published a study showing that global inflation is where we're heading. Basically, the government tries to lower inflation numbers by using fairly unrealistic calculations in some cases, so to understate the gravity of the problem.

Full time entrepreneur! http://www.fredericpatenaude.com

Here's the link! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_ch27z7m38 Oohhh... that was interesting!

If you want to read really good business books I recommend: The eMyth, by Michael Gerber — Ultimate model of business systems! Getting Things Done, by David Allen... ultimate guide on productivity and organizing work for self-propelled entrepreneurs, managers and employees. Both very popular books. I own my own business by the way. The influence that these books have had is far greater than the 7 Habits.

I read the book a few years ago... prior to my exposure to Objectivism. I must say overall I didn't particularly enjoy the tone of the book but some of the concepts impacted me in a positive way, in regards to efficiency and business dealings. One of the concepts or "habit" in the book is about creating WIN-WIN situations in business dealings. I don't know how I would view the book now but it deals mostly with efficiency and business, and also about working on what's most important in your life as opposed to constantly being busy. I guess the most insightful part of the book is the quadrant of - Important, and Urgent - Urgent, not Important - Not Important, Not Urgent - And Not Urgent, but Important Maybe just read that part and skip the rest...

I read "The Power of Now" when it first came out. The book never made a real impression on me as I was never able to fully understand how to implement the vague information presented in my own life, and achieve practical results with it. The book has the lure of all New Age books, and is basically a variation of "thoughts are not real" and "the material universe is pure illusion." Tolle claims to be "enlightened" in the manner of enlightened gurus of the East. He has a hoard of followers and numerous study-groups all over the world are trying to make sense of what he says but unable to make it work into their lives. "Thoughts are not real", says Tolle. Live in the present moment. Do not dwell in the present or the future. Although it is not explained clearly, the philosophy Tolle presents is anti-logic and anti-reason, as he exhort people to "go back inside of your own bodies and bodily feelings" and avoid getting absorbed in the world of thoughts. If someone seeks a lifeboat or something, or are involved in abusive or emotionally unstable patterns of relationship, they might find some good words of advice in that regard in Tolle's books, but probably would benefit more from proper counseling rather than falling for a possibly dangerous New Age philosophy. 'Possibly Dangerous" because it leads nowhere except perhaps to the renunciation of the pleasures of the modern world and a life of austerity and/or public service.

Thanks for all the responses and the great insights. My perspective on the US may be flawed but whenever I spent a day in a US airport I cringe at what I see broadcast on national television. To me it's nothing short of blatant fear-based propaganda. (Example: broadcast that the "alert level" of any particular day is red, yellow orange or whatever, without any proof whatsoever) By the way, I lived for 3 years in the US from 1997 until 2000 and completely enjoyed my experience there. Lots has changed since.

I will say first that I'm rather new to Objectivism and I'm here to learn more. I just read Atlas Shrugged and was deeply impressed and moved by it. I come with the ideas compiled from reading books like "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" and other titles as well as personal reflections, that military interventions in Irak are about control over the oil resource rather than the alleged "war on terrorism". As for finite and infinite it is my understanding that electricity can be produced in numerous ways: sun, hydroelectrical power, nuclear, etc., whereas the earth eventually will run out of oil if we keep on using it at the rate we are. I'd be willing to hear your point of view on the current state of the world/Irak war, etc., and American intervention in these countries (and others). I get the feeling from reading this forum that most users are of a more pro-American point of view (excuse the term but I want to mean the idea that American military interventions around the world are for the "Freedom of American People" and not for the purpose of controlling the world by force, which is what I believe is the case). That's a diversion of topic, but I wonder, why do some many users feel that America is the greatest country in the world (at the moment)? I'm Canadian and I don't approve the form of governmental control in our pro-socialist country (welfare system, health system, burden of taxes, making the rich pay, etc.) But the direction the US is taking seems to be more like a Fascist state, certainly not the capitalist ideal depicted in Atlas Shrugged. To me the US seems to head in a direction that is best described as a mixture of 1984 and Atlas Shrugged. The use of propaganda and fear tactics is widespread, the "patriot acts" and other forms of control, the invasive government that can throw you in jail without a trial, the IRS gun-equipped agents that can bust your house without a notice, and so on. That's my perception and I think it's an accurate perception of what's going on in the US right now: a once-great country that is now moving to a fascist state of fear-based control. I know this is off topic but this is really what I was hoping to get from this forum: an objectivist perspective on the current direction of the US government, and of course, of the Canadian and other world economies. As for the electric car, I think it's a great idea if given a chance to live.

My understanding is that oil is a finite resource, electricity is an infinite resource (to a large extent). The wars of the world seem to be in part about control of this resource, and monopoly over this resource. Therefore a product like electric cars or other technology pose a threat to companies and government who control the oil resource.

Today I was about to put on a t-shirt that was gifted to me by a friend. When I got this t-shirt (I hadn't read anything by Ayn Rand) yet, I didn't quite understand what it meant. I dismissed the message as some kind of new-age non-sense, but thought I would were it sometimes because the design was nice. Today, I read it again and realized I couldn't wear it anymore. I couldn't give it away either. I had to get rid of it completely. Sorry my friend, but I can't accept this message. It goes against everything I've believed in my life, but I couldn't really put the proper words to it until I read Atlas Shrugged. The T-Shirt Message says: "Follow the heart as if the brain is there to confuse Distract Take away the good day"

I think the movie makes very valid points. The real reasons why the electric car was killed was not because GM couldn't make any money with it, although at some point in the movie the statement was made that the PUBLIC was guilty of not being smart enough to accept it. But without going into a discussion about who killed the car, let's say that governmental regulations are a big part of it. Here in Canada we have an inventor of a great electric vehicle that can't get it on the market in Canada because the government won't approve it. These governmental regulations are a form of control. The truth is that the electric car is not dead. There's quite a few companies that are working right now to release new electric vehicles on the road. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_vehicle Even Toyota is working actively on its own EV, after its success with the Hybrid. See: http://www.hybridcars.com/news2/enerdel-lithium-prius.html Who cares about GM? If they're not smart enough to take advantage of a concept that is a true revolution (maybe a small version of the "motor" in Atlas Shrugged), other companies can take over and do it. The Canadian company that I mentioned is called the Zenn Car (see: http://www.zenncars.com). Apparently the owner created the car because he was frustrated that this car didn't exist. So if it doesn't exist... build your own. That's what entrepreneurs do. The problem is when governmental regulations come in the way and add their own control. Or other companies (such as oil companies) steal, lie and destroy and prevent the use of new technology to delay their own inevitable self-destruction.

Je n'ai pas pu le trouver non plus! C'est domage, car j'aimerais l'offrir à des amis.