Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Ivan Raszl

Regulars
  • Content Count

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Ivan Raszl

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  • Birthday 02/02/1975

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Australia
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Relationship status
    Married
  • Sexual orientation
    No Answer
  • Real Name
    Ivan Raszl
  • Copyright
    Must Attribute
  • Digg Nick
    ivankraszl

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    iraszl
  • MSN
    iraszl
  • Website URL
    http://raszl.net
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Australia
  1. I just watched part 1 and loved it. I think they made a great decision to place it in 2016. Well done. They made the best of the book I can imagine. I recommend it to all my friends.
  2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pVvpv2Peu4 After watching this show I must say I'm pretty surprised by the shallow arguments against objectivism presented by these otherwise intelligent folks. On this show they demonstrate lack of knowledge about objectivism because they ask quite basic questions about it. And this lack of knowledge is the source of their arguments. To me the way they patronisingly joke around as if they had superior knowledge makes them look a bit silly. Let me address the arguments one by one and please correct me wherever I'm wrong. 1. - 2. They agree on these poin
  3. Thanks, I will have to re-read this with a clear head in the morning.
  4. This came up on Facebook with my friends. Seems like an interesting interview. Did Greenspan found a flaw in Objectivism? REP. HENRY WAXMAN: The question I have for you is, you had an ideology, you had a belief that free, competitive — and this is your statement — “I do have an ideology. My judgment is that free, competitive markets are by far the unrivaled way to organize economies. We’ve tried regulation. None meaningfully worked.” That was your quote. You had the authority to prevent irresponsible lending practices that led to the subprime mortgage crisis. You were advised to do so by
  5. Thank you so much. My questions are answered.
  6. Thanks for the replies. Let me focus the questions more: Is there anything that will prevent us running out of oil in our current market based economy? Are we going to reach peak oil? If yes, is this not a grave danger that everyone will suffer from?
  7. I'm an objectivist and I have a question that is not totally clear to me. Anyone seen the Zeigeist movies? What do you think about the idea that the current monetary system is killing our planet because there is no incentive in the capitalist system to protect non-renewable resources and nature in general. You guys helped me with the issues of the ocean pollutions saying that if the oceans would owned by individuals there would be a good reason to protect them by those who own them and governments would protect these private properties as well. But this doesn't really work with non-renewabl
  8. I'm confused about whether he's doing the right or wrong thing? If it was private stolen info it would be clearly wrong to publish right? But this is government info which is supposed to be owned by Americans or something... Please help!
  9. I have another issue that bugs me. If a democratic government through an election decides to give a certain free social service for example healthcare. An let's say 75% voted for it. Is it immoral to do this government based healthcare because the rest 25% didn't want it, yet they will be forced to pay for the 75% as well? If that's the case, what if in a hypothetical situation 100% would vote for such a free social service? It can happen in a small community with only a few hundred people. They may decide to have free ER care or other service. Is it moral to do such a service for free (
  10. Thanks for your full answer. I fully agree with you and the other members. And I now have a clearer understanding of how such an issue should be broken down. I thought you're hostile because you didn't specifically answer the question, but prompted me to think my own question over. I now realize that this wasn't meant to be a rude, retrospectively it makes sense. At the time however it didn't answer any questions I had, it posed even more. Sorry for saying that. Thanks for your help guys.
  11. I agree. What if the child dies because they can't provide emergency care at home. Is the woman responsible for the death as negligence?
  12. I've read that environmental issues can be solved by privatising all available land and oceans. Therefore giving each area an owner who will protect because it's in his own interest. I think this may actually work. Presumably this is a good solution how can this be accomplished? How can we decide who gets what? Also, in a related question. What if I own a huge piece of rain forest that gives air not just to me but many other property owners in the world and I decided to cut it all off because I want to spend the money. Does that mean I violate other people's property rights as I remove natu
×
×
  • Create New...