Bastian Hayek

Yaron Brook says (via Facebook): My latest on PJTV (I am now a regular -- every Friday): http://www.pjtv.com/video/PJTV_Daily/The_E...ndment%3F/1777/

Some more: http://www.pjtv.com/video/PJTV_Daily/A_Ral...Street%3F/1678/ http://www.pjtv.com/video/Tea_Party_Coalit...rry_Jones/1705/ http://www.pjtv.com/video/PJTV_Daily/Tea_P...KUT903S4XHN91cs

There are many books getting a boost from Obama: Source: Instapundit I hope the Ayn Rand Institute gets a boost, too. Not only from book sales, but in the long run from increased manpower.

That's why I asked for their actions. Many people today, especially who call themselves neolibertarian rather than neocons (as I once did), use the word "democracy" and do not mean illiberal democracy, they also fight for republicanism. Their problem is just that they don't have good philosophical bases. One can always argue with them about that and achieve at least some results. Maybe someone should write a letter to Freedom House asking them.

According to their website "Freedom House, a non-profit, nonpartisan organization, is a clear voice for democracy and freedom around the world. Through a vast array of international programs and publications, Freedom House is working to advance the remarkable worldwide expansion of political and economic freedom." http://www.freedomhouse.org/template.cfm?page=1 My question is, does anyone of you have deeper insight into their actions and may tell me whether they are advocating democracy in the altruist neocon fashion or whether they could further the cause of individual rights and real freedom around the world? Contrary to the necons they actually seem to care about freedom in so called "allied" countries like Saudi-Arabia. But do they further "democracy" or real republicanism? And after all this is evaluated, would it be morally right to help this organisation? Would it be any good donating to them?

Gov. Rick Perry today joined state Rep. Brandon Creighton and sponsors of House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 50 in support of states’ rights under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. He also mentions individual rights. But what do you think of this resolution? http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81R...ml/HC00050I.htm

I think you all might be interested in these video regarding a ficticious (but not at all impossible) "day the dollar collapses". You will also see Peter Schiff arguing in the video. And while there seems to be a little bit schadenfreude on part of the Euro fans (I don't think the Euro will fare much better, it seems Peter Schiff thinks so) it is not so far from reality if Bernanke continues to print money and China loses its confidence in the Dollar.

During the gold bear market there was little investment in gold mines. It will take some time and will further increase the price. What interests me is what if Ray Kurzweil is right and we will experience a technological Singularity.. What if nanotechnology makes it able to print as much gold as we want?

I quote from Peter Schiff's "Crash Proof":

The dollar sign is not a good symbol for Objectivism. The dollar is worthless paper and not as good as gold. How about a lightbulb? The forbidden Enlightenment... (just kidding!)

Wow. I did not know that. So these books are not illegal in China? There might be hope. Some of the readers might become more interested in Objectivism. Some might be conservative and stay that way, because they don't grasp anything. Some might even become Objectivists. Others will get depressed and buy something funny next time. After all, it also means more money for the ARI, doesn't it?

Is there a Chinese or Russian edition? I would think those are forbidden by the authorities, there might be some on the black market. Impossible to get numbers, isn't it? Here in Germany (amazon.de) says Atlas shrugged is 247 in English books, the German edition only available as used books.

I don't know which version you looked at but one version is currently at #24 in Books! The fact there are different versions might suggest that there are even more people buying it than the rank 24 would make us think. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/045201187...ASIN=0452011876

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1384 This makes me so mad. The chances of Iran actually getting nukes is now, I think, at almost 100%.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/finance...ial-crisis.html According to this Telegraph article Russia - as a country rich in gold - advocates a partial return to the international Gold standard. Now that will not make them a capitalist nation, but maybe it will start a discussion about gold and money that is more mainstream.

I don't know about the argument against religion. You have to wait and see how the judges look like after the Obama term. There will probably be no chance of any decision against abortion even under a very Christian president 2012. Furthermore, Sanford doesn't seem to be thrilled with injecting religion into politics. I heard somewhere that he even is a closet Austrian. I think he would be the best choice of what is currently there.. And he gains momentum: http://washingtonindependent.com/35222/con...anford-for-2012 I am betting on Sanford, and hope he picks Schiff Economic Advisor, but someone less libertarian National Security Advisor (how bout Peikoff?? )

yeah that doesn't work posting it, but you can link it by simply copy&pasting it into "what's on your mind"...

http://www.pjtv.com/video/PJTV_Daily/Is_At...RLJPIxYeATswuas Yaron Brook on PJTV, says don't go John Galt but fight...

Am I wrong to assume a connection between GDP per capita and Economic Freedom?

Well I don't know what the long term effect of all this is.. so I wouldn't start it.. Would you if it were legal? Cause you say it is moral.

Thank you. You are probably right, but the standard could easily change. Enhanced people would be the status quo and those that decided against the use would find themselves in the jobs that are not that good. Since this is no reason to ban the drugs I think the interesting question is whether it is moral to take it..

Does any of this have something to do with original topic? What about the morality of legalizing it now? I had hoped more people here were interested in the article.

That is a good rebuttal. But what about the fact that they would fall back if for example most employers would make it mandatory. I agree that is not really force though.

I am all for legalization for the same reasons as with other drugs. However, Well, that is certainly bad for those who do not want to take it, but does that give them the right to forbid it to anyone? I think not. Whether it is moral to take them or not is a different question, feel free to state your opinion. as one pessimist comment said: or it is the biochemical first wave of what Kurzweil predicted to follow with the merging of our brains with technology.. Source: http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/12...-enhancing.html

Capitalism works. I mean this honestly, since I don't yet know about every aspect of Objectivist philosophy: I would like to know what the objection to Pragmatism is regarding the results. Would an honest Pragmatist not come to Capitalism in the end? I know his way is wrong, but what about the end? I never fully understood that.