It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ayn Rand Was Right - Wealthy on Strike Against Obama

page: 2
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 02:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Well .. is he right? He's obviously exaggerating the word 'strike'. But the basic idea about excaping high taxes is sound - that corporations and the wealthy are moving and much of it has to do with high taxes. Look at what happened to Boeing recently. They wanted to move for the good of the company, where unions and taxes wouldn't strangle them and so they could stay in business - making a profit like business is supposed to - but the unions went crazy and threatened court action if they moved.


I understand that it happens and the unions can be a problem....but dam man workers at Boeing I would think are highly trained with an important skill set. Is it really far to say they are strangling profits? They cant drag down a good dollar without felling like they are left leaning or part of the problem. Why should they see themselves in the same vain as a tax?

Oh and this flap comming from the other side of the thing. Like man they have no choice but to take it to China. Never mind that very attractive low labor wage over there. Dont suppose that would jade their thinking against their loyal american skilled laborers?

Anyway anything for the share holders. Just a lot of folks doing things overseas and blaming labor cost as to why the left america. I just dont buy it all. If they could they would find a way to get mexicans into the coal mines they are so profit driven.




posted on Jun, 24 2011 @ 03:06 PM
link   
I've written this in several posts, but I'll repeat it. I live in Illinois now, but we are soon moving to Texas. The tax hike, the gun laws, no recording the police, [ they actually made that a FELONY ] is just too much. We want to live somewhere Big Brother is not breathing down our necks and watching every thing we do. People want to live free and are willing to uproot their families to do it. I'm not a criminal, never had anything more than a speeding ticket. But the cops around here, state and local, treat people like armed felons. Had enough of the Guilty Until Proven Innocent crap.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by brianmg5


Henry Ford did the opposite - increasing his workers' wages, thereby helping to create a class of consumers.


A great example of how empowering the middle and lower classes to buy the things they want feeds the economy the "food" it requires to stay alive. Sadly, almost EVERYONE of that time labeled Henry Ford as a crazy socialist. That is until Ford started reporting record breaking profits. Because not only did he pay his employees more, he offered them great deals on Ford vehicles. Therefore, they all bought his cars with their extra cash. Brilliant, not to mention a Win for business AND a Win for the middle class consumer. You don't see to much of that anymore in todays cut-throat business.


I am by NO means a socialist, but the last three decades have seen reverse socialism - wealth redistributed from the bottom to the top through job consolidation, outsourcing, stingy pay increases, and an overall extreme reluctance to hire workers back when things pick up.

Imagine if somehow a "downsizing moratorium" had been instituted by force of law back in 2006 or so when the wheels first started coming off the economy. This would in effect have acted as a "private sector-side stimulus" that would have kept things afloat and perhaps would have actually increased sales and eventually profits.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Youmakemewonder
extol the virtues of being a godless selfish prick.

Is it really selfish to want to keep what you earn?


Not too familiar with your own topic of your own thread, are you?

Ayn Rand on the virtue of being selfish.


It is ok. I have noticed that most Republicans and pseudo-Libertarians that praise Rand have no clue what they are talking about.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Were the wealthy on strike through the entire Bush administration after getting their tax cuts...while at the same time sending millions of American jobs overseas? What about after we bailed out all of Wall street? They can "strike" all they want, even though the wealthiest in this country used to pay over 90 percent in capital gains during the Eisenhower administration, yet now many aren't just not paying in any taxes, but actually getting more money back than they have paid in.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And for the life of me, how can Ayn Rand believers and Christians be aligned with the same political party?

They are nearly polar opposites of one another.

Any Rand believes in being selfish and that much of society is parasites...she also hated religion.

Is this what Christians believe? um no.

The religious right should leave the Republican party and form their own...but they stay together because of abortion and gay marriage. That's really it.
edit on 25-6-2011 by David9176 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Something to read for all the Koch drinking fools.

www.orthodoxytoday.org...



One Big Brother is of course, a socializing elite (as we know, several cut-rate brands are on the shelves). Miss Rand, as the enemy of any socializing force, calls in a Big Brother of her own contriving to do battle with the other. In the name of free enterprise, therefore, she plumps for a technocratic elite (I find no more inclusive word than technocratic to bracket the industrial-financial-engineering caste she seems to have in mind). When she calls "productive achievement" man's "noblest activity," she means, almost exclusively, technological achievement, supervised by such a managerial political bureau. She might object that she means much, much more; and we can freely entertain her objections. But in sum, that is just what she means. For that is what, in reality, it works out to. And in reality, too, by contrast, with fiction, this can only head into a dictatorship, however benign, living and acting beyond good and evil, a law unto itself (as Miss Rand believes it should be), and feeling any restraint on itself as, in practice, criminal, and, in morals, vicious — as Miss Rand clearly feels it to be. Of course, Miss Rand nowhere calls for a dictatorship. I take her to be calling for an aristocracy of talents. We cannot labor here why, in the modern world, the pre-conditions for aristocracy, an organic growth, no longer exist, so that impulse toward aristocracy always emerges now in the form of dictatorship.

Nor has the author, apparently, brooded on the degree to which, in a wicked world, a materialism of the Right and a materialism of the Left, first surprisingly resemble, then in action tend to blend each with each, because, while differing at the top in avowed purposed, and possibly in conflict there, at bottom they are much the same thing. The embarrassing similarities between Hitler's National Socialism and Stalin's brand of Communism are familiar. For the world, as seen in materialist view from the Left. The question becomes chiefly: who is to run that world in whose interests, or perhaps, at best, who can run it more efficiently?

Something of this implication is fixed in the book's dictatorial tone, which is much its most striking feature. Out of a lifetime of reading, I can recall no other book in which a tone of overriding arrogance was so implacably sustained. Its shrillness is without reprieve. Its dogmatism is without appeal. In addition, the mind, which finds this one natural to it, shares other characteristics of its type. 1) It consistently mistakes raw force for strength, and the rawer the force, the more reverent the posture of the mind before it. 2) It supposes itself to be the bringer of a final revelation. Therefore, resistance to the Message cannot be tolerated because disagreement can never be merely honest, prudent or just humanly fallible. Dissent from revelation so final (because, the author would say, so reasonable) can only be willfully wicked. There are ways of dealing with such wickedness, and, in fact, right reason itself enjoins them. From almost any page of Atlas Shrugged, a voice can be heard, from painful necessity, commanding: " To the gas chambers — go!" The same inflexibly self-righteous stance results, too (in the total absence of any saving humor), in odd extravagances of inflection and gesture — that Dollar Sign, for example. At first, we try to tell ourselves that these are just lapses, that this mind has, somehow, mislaid the discriminating knack that most of us pray will warn us in time of the differences between what is effective and firm, and what is wildly grotesque and excessive. Soon we suspect something worse. We suspect that this mind finds, precisely in extravagance, some exalting merit; feels a surging release of power and passion precisely in smashing up the house. A tornado might feel this way, or Carrie Nation.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Who cares what the author thinks or believes? The BOOK, Atlas Shrugged, provided the necessary insight into a basic truth. She might be a loon, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Many people are moochers and looters. Look around you and you can see the truth for yourself. It is not unChristian to allow moochers to starve. "He who will not work shall not eat". We should help those who NEED it, but that is not a function of government. That is a function of family first and foremost. When the family cannot, then the community members and the church should pitch in and help out.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


Tell that to Commissioner Phil Diamond. He is known as a staunch fiscal conservative. And if you don't know who he is. Hes the guy behind the ordiance you can't feed the homeless in Orlando.

www.cityoforlando.net...

orlandofoodnotbombs.org...

I guess when it comes to feeding large crowds the concession vendors have the market all tied up.

orlandofoodnotbombs.org...




This is the relevant text of the "large group feedings"/anti-homeless feeding ordinance passed by the Orlando City Council on July 24.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORLANDO, FLORIDA:
SECTION ONE: Section 18A.01, of the Code of the City of Orlando be, and the same is hereby, amended to read as follows:
Sec. 18A.01. Definitions.

The following terms, when used in this Chapter shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them in this section:

• • • •

(23) Large Group Feeding is defined as an event intended to attract, attracting, or likely to attract 25 or more people, including distributors and servers, in a park or park facility owned or controlled by the City, including adjacent sidewalks and rights-of-way in the GDPD, for the delivery or service of food. Excluded from this definition are activities of City licensed or contracted concessionaires, lessees, or licensees.

(24) Greater Orlando Park District (GDPD) is defined as an area within the limits of the City of Orlando, Florida, extending out a two (2) mile radius in all directions from City Hall and including all of the parks and park facilities owned or controlled by the City touched by that radius, in their entirety.

SECTION TWO: Section 18A.09-2, of the Code of the City of Orlando be, and the same is hereby, created to read as follows:
Sec. 18A.09-2. Large Group Feeding in Parks and Park Facilities Owned or Controlled by the City in the Greater Downtown Park District (GDPD).
Except for activities of a governmental agency within the scope of its governmental authority, or unless specifically permitted to do so by a permit or approval issued pursuant to this Chapter or by City Council:

(a) It is unlawful to knowingly sponsor, conduct, or participate in the distribution or service of food at a large group feeding at a park or park facility owned or controlled by the City of Orlando within the boundary of the Greater Downtown Park District without a Large Group Feeding Permit issued by the City Director of Families, Parks and Recreation or his/her designee.

(b) It is unlawful to fail to produce and display the Large Group Feeding Permit during or after a large group feeding, while still on site, to a law enforcement officer upon demand. It is an affirmative defense to this violation if the offender can later produce, to the City Prosecutor or the Court, a Large Group Feeding Permit issued to him/her, or the group, which was valid at the time of the event.

(c) The Director of Families, Parks and Recreation or his/her designee shall issue a Large Group Feeding Permit upon application and payment of the application fee as established by the City. Not more than two (2) Large Group Feeding Permits shall be issued to the same person, group, or organization for large group feedings for the same park in the GDPD in a twelve (12) consecutive month period.

(d) Any applicant shall have the right to appeal the denial of a Large Group Feeding Permit pursuant to appeal procedure in Sec. 18A.15 with written notice to the Director of Families, Parks and Recreation and with a copy to the City Clerk.

SECTION THREE: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion hereto.

SECTION FOUR: This ordinance shall take effect upon passage



I guess you first demonize them. Then you criminalise them. Then you line then up for the gas chambers. Who wants all those undesirables around any way they just bring down the nation as a whole right. Thats what the Nazis thought.
edit on 25-6-2011 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by JBA2848


Tell that to Commissioner Phil Diamond. He is known as a staunch fiscal conservative. And if you don't know who he is. Hes the guy behind the ordinance you can't feed the homeless in Orlando.
Never heard of him. What do he and his ordinance have to do with not feeding those who WILL NOT work?


I guess you first demonize them. Then you criminalise them. Then you line then up for the gas chambers. Who wants all those undesirables around any way they just bring down the nation as a whole right. Thats what the Nazis thought.
Are you just talking to yourself? Or do you have an actual point? As far as I am concerned, "food not bombs" is doing the right thing. That Orlando ordinance is a disgrace. If a PRIVATE group wants to feed the homeless, I am all for it. More power to them. My issue is with the GOVERNMENT confiscating funds to do the same. They cannot do it as well or as efficiently as a private group can. I have no problem with churches, families and private groups helping people with donations or with their own money.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


Why didn't the wealthy revolt when their taxes were 90 percent during the Eisenhower administration? Shouldn't that have been an Ayn Rand induced prophesy as well?

Why didn't they cut and run then? Did they actually care about their country and it's workers then...and just not now?



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


You've been talkign about Atlas Shrugged being a prophesy for a few years now. I actually bought the book myself but could never bring myself to read it....afterall I know the premise behind it...which is why this book is pushed so strongly by the wealthy.

The book, and Ayn Rands beliefs, gives reason to their own beliefs and power.

The rich can revolt....but then the small people will revolt as a result....and the little people far outnumber those at the very top.

IMO...you should open up your mind to another line of thinking.

Quite frankly, I should take my copy of Atlus Shrugged and light a match under it. It's nothing but hate filled, elitist drivel.

Again, I can't see how a good Christian can align themselves with someone who shares Ayn Rands beliefs.
edit on 25-6-2011 by David9176 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


Why didn't the wealthy revolt when their taxes were 90 percent during the Eisenhower administration? Shouldn't that have been an Ayn Rand induced prophesy as well?

Why didn't they cut and run then? Did they actually care about their country and it's workers then...and just not now?

Is this a joke, or do you really not understand that 92% was the top marginal rate? And that the $200k would not be the top marginal rate?

Today, the top marginal bracket starts at $373,650 and is only taxed at 35% for income ABOVE that level. In 1945, the bracket equivalent to this level when adjusted for inflation was taxed at 65%. See what happens when you use real numbers?

Look, if you don't understand how progressive taxation based on marginal brackets works, then you shouldn't be having this conversation.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


You've been talkign about Atlas Shrugged being a prophesy for a few years now. I actually bought the book myself but could never bring myself to read it....afterall I know the premise behind it...which is why this book is pushed so strongly by the wealthy.

The book, and Ayn Rands beliefs, gives reason to their own beliefs and power.

The rich can revolt....but then the small people will revolt as a result....and the little people far outnumber those at the very top.

IMO...you should open up your mind to another line of thinking.

Quite frankly, I should take my copy of Atlus Shrugged and light a match under it. It's nothing but hate filled, elitist drivel.

Again, I can't see how a good Christian can align themselves with someone who shares Ayn Rands beliefs.
edit on 25-6-2011 by David9176 because: (no reason given)
You have no idea what you are talking about. There was no "revolt" of the rich. Please stop trying to interpret something you have never read.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 





Please stop trying to interpret something you have never read.


Enlighten me then. What is Atlas Shrugged about?



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 





Please stop trying to interpret something you have never read.


Enlighten me then. What is Atlas Shrugged about?
Read the book.
EDIT: Apparently you could learn a lot from it.
edit on 25-6-2011 by sonofliberty1776 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 





Is this a joke, or do you really not understand that 92% was the top marginal rate? And that the $200k would not be the top marginal rate?


Yes I understand that and it's what I was referring to...sorry I didnt' make it more clear. Quite funny though.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 





Read the book.


Well, with your vast knowledge, I'm quite sure you could sum it up nicely so I could better understand your arguments. Does atlas shrugged have cliff notes?


I bet you could sum it up in one sentence for me...can you?



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 03:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 





Read the book.


Well, with your vast knowledge, I'm quite sure you could sum it up nicely so I could better understand your arguments. Does atlas shrugged have cliff notes?


I bet you could sum it up in one sentence for me...can you?
Can I? Yes. It would be a long sentence though. Will I? No. If you want to bash it, at least read it. That way you don't SOUND LIKE an idiot when you talk about it. One major point, the "rich" do not revolt. The book barely concerns "rich" and "poor". Some of the producers were poor. Some of the moochers and many of the looters were rich.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 03:50 PM
link   
The reason the Koch brothers love to push this book and Ayn Rand is because she promotes what there father was and did in Russia befor he was kicked out. And what he was and did in Germany befor he was kicked out. He was the corrupt Russian Illuminati and corrupt German Illuminati. The were on top and called all the shots and got rich at everybodies expense. And they loved the dictatorships that put them there and held them there. The US screwed up when they thought the enemy of my enemy is my friend and excepted them back in this country. Objectivism is cult based on a fictional story and used to base a cult following that the Republican party seems to love right now. But when the people decide to figure out what is the real story behind it they will revolt.



posted on Jun, 25 2011 @ 03:54 PM
link   
And if you want to know how the rich go on strike.
The banks don't loan money. And the payroll services don't allow people to use them. That means all small businesses dry up.




top topics



 
7
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join