Lucio

Maybe what you perceive as an opportunity to learn, is perceived by your friends as an insurmountable problem. Get your IQ. (http://iqtest.dk) If you're above the median, then you must learn that you have a world-view that is different from your friends. Keep that in mind and do not think that everybody sees the world as you do.

Yes, you're right. It's underground, but with "light and space". Thanks. The identity of the character is kept in the dark, but not the scene.

The cafeteria was underground, and Galt sits in a dark corner, at least in the scene where Eddie reveals to Galt that DT and HR were lovers.

I see the fact of not showing Galt's face as to be consistent with the book. Galt doesn't even "talk" in the first part. When he's talking with Willers you only get a glimpse of the questions he make, when Willers repeats them. I have a image in my head, from reading the book, of a dark 50's cafeteria, the ambient denoting economical depression, and so badly iluminated than you can't see Willers's interlocutor.

Are you sure that the problem is how she looks? Questions: What does her skin tastes to you? How can you describe her smell? Have you had sex in the dark?

http://www.paulgraham.com/wealth.html My two cents: You can create wealth, let's say you assemble a MP3 player, but if you can't sell it in the market at a price above your cost, you're not "making money". I think "making money" means creating monetizable whealt in a market, vs. just "creating wealth". Another two cents: Gold is wealth, and, if broadly accepted in the market in the form of coins, is ALSO money. A Federal Reserve Note is only a medium of exchange, it's only money, it's not wealth. Fiat money is the biggest magic trick in the history of governments and economics,

So there are some forms of blackmail that involve force? Cool down. I didn't make it up, it is a paragraph form the link included in the post. Again, cool down and look for the definitions of the terms. Blackmail DOES involve coercion.

OK, You're rigth. I was just exploring universal affirmations... Using objectivism definitions, all rights violations are immoral, but not all immoral acts are rights violations.

If it is immoral to initiate force, you must stop aggressors with guns. Then you're enforcing moral behavior with guns. I wrote "(objectively) immoral" in order to use the term "moral" as defined by objectivism and of course differentiate from any definition of moral that includes a "soul". You didn't read "(objectively) immoral" or it was not clear enough? (fair question, not rhetorical)

"Fraud" it is immoral and illegal and does not require explicitly "initiation of the use of force". Please re-read Dante´s argument. By Blackmailing you're extracting a value from an individual by means of a threat to destroy another value. "Give me money or else I'll cause you harm" http://www.atlassociety.org/cth--775-Force_Fraud.aspx Ayn Rand wrote that "To violate man's rights means to compel him to act against own judgment, or to expropriate his values. Basically, there is only one way to do it: by the use of physical force." ("Man's Rights," The Virtue of Selfishness [paperback]

I believe Dante's point settled the question. It's objectively immoral => It should be illegal in an objective gov. On more general terms: Is the following affirmation true? "In a Oist gov, all that is (objectively) immoral should also be illegal"

I agree. But when it's cheaper to pay for the eventual accidents, the most common scenario is the mine owner's falsely claiming to the workers that "there is no problem, nor serious risk" (committing fraud), since "There is a serious risk of death" it is not a good marketing slogan in order to attract workers. So, to hold the owners accountable on their claims of working conditions you need some form of legal documentation, and you (as a government) can/must force him to sustain the claimed working conditions (to avoid fraud). That's a needed form of objective regulation. Also you'll need so

That's a good question. Free market requires failure in order to separate good products from bad products. It's ok when you're talking about apples, but it is not ok when the required failure imply deaths. For example, bad doctors in a free market will be discovered -after- they kill a few pacients. In this free market doctors regulation/deregulation case, there is a response: Doctors qualification can be handled by private quality assurance companies, and patients can choose a "qualified" doctor from a trusted qualifier. But, in the case of coal mining... What would be the proper oi

How about http://www.freestateproject.org ?

100 is the median, but what 132 means depends on the "standard deviation" of the test used. For example, in USA, a SD of 15 it's normally used, so an IQ of 130 imples the 98th precentile, and is required to join mensa. In UK, (the original mensa tests), a SD of 24 was used, so an IQ of 148 was required to join mensa.