Goddamn. Third thread on this stupid subject. Goddamn.

" has becomean insufferable asshole. "

Why does this blog software do that? The correct text is:

become[ellipse]an insufferable asshole.

"Third thread on this stupid subject. "

No, for some odd reason, there are two threads titled "Atlas Drugged" both posted by Corky. They both refer to another article than this thread is based on.

Nullifidian, why do you bring this misogynist article to the DR? Typical Liberal. They can't handle a real woman with strong opinions so they resort to name calling. They do the same with Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, etc.

"Nullifidian, why do you bring this misogynist article to the DR? "

#4 | Posted by member2586

What is the source of your obsessive rage about the Violence Against Women Act, anyway? Ever been arrested for spousal abuse, by any chance?

Nullifidian, have you ever heard of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment? Well, don't worry if you haven't Joe Biden doesn't have a clue either.

Ever been arrested for spousal abuse, by any chance?

#5 | Posted by nullifidian

"the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment?"

Is that in the 'country' of Africa?

Love,
Sarah

"Is that in the 'country' of Africa?"

No, in the United States, all 57 of them.

Sincerely

Obama

Obama: who graduated Summa Cum Laude from Columbia and Magna Cum Laude from Harvard. Sure he didn't know there are 50 states .. and 7 territories. lol Bet yer bupkis Palin didn't know that...even with 6 colleges to get her BA

Palin doesn't know what time it is. Lipstick - pig.

"No, in the United States, all 57 of them."

If that's the best you have you don't have much.

So now the statists are blaming Rand's ideas on the recession. LOL! Atlas Shrugged predicts the failure of statism.

So now the statists are blaming Rand's ideas on the recession. LOL! Atlas Shrugged predicts the failure of statism.

"Statism". Meaningless right-libertarian jibberish. Everyone who isn't a "libertarian" is an evil "statist". Everyone to the left of Ludwig Von Miserly or Glen Bitch is an evil "statist". lol. What a loon.

"Andrew Corsello's The Bitch is Back article from GQ on the boorish subject of Ayn Rand Assholes is probably the best takedown of Ayn Rand's followers (and Alan Greenspan and Wall Street) I've yet seen and certainly the funniest (other than Stephen Colbert's). It was about time for an article like this to appear and I am glad it was Corsello who wrote it."

"By the time I was in my twenties and living in the Wall Street area of Manhattan, I'd see young, obviously Republican, stock broker types reading Atlas Shrugged on the subway and I'd feel silent contempt for them. Discovering Ayn Rand after high school is bad enough, but to discover her post-college is true pathetica. Her strident "greed is good" moralizing about the 'virtues of selfishness' (one of her best known non-fiction titles) would have an appeal to would-be Gordon Gekkos, of course, but yuck. Talk about an impoverished intellectual diet."

"Statism". Meaningless right-libertarian jibberish. Everyone who isn't a "libertarian" is an evil "statist". Everyone to the left of Ludwig Von Miserly or Glen Bitch is an evil "statist". lol. What a loon.
#15 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

WTF is that? It's all emotion like the screed you posted to start this thread. LOL!

Statism means worship of the state. It's another religion. The politicians and their corporate cronies are tearing this nation apart, robbing it to the ground, and this Marxist defends the state despite its complicity, always directing his ire at private ownership. What a loser!

Her strident "greed is good" moralizing about the 'virtues of selfishness' (one of her best known non-fiction titles) would have an appeal to would-be Gordon Gekkos, of course, but yuck. Talk about an impoverished intellectual diet."

Rand was a defender of honest greed. Leave it to the socialists to muddle honest greed with dishonest greed. That way they dehumanize their victims for wanting to keep more of what they honestly earned.

What are the socialists going to do when they reach their desired egalitarian goal, when everybody is poor? Who will they loot and plunder then?

Ray you fool that has never been the goal of socialism. The goal has always been to limit the amount of inequality in society. Uncontrolled capitalism doesn't work. Far too many are exploited while a small minority controls the wealth. Ray you are the whiniest senior I have ever met. Had you managed your money better throughout your life you would be set. Instead you'll work until you die. Hopefully it'll be as a walmart greeter real soon.

Ray you fool that has never been the goal of socialism. The goal has always been to limit the amount of inequality in society.

What! You just described the goal of socialism. An egalitarian society is a static society. By hampering those who are capable of creating wealth, socialism glorifies widespread poverty. The collapse of the Soviet Union taught you nothing.

Uncontrolled capitalism doesn't work. Far too many are exploited while a small minority controls the wealth.

You're a joke! The last vestige of capitalism died when Nixon took the dollar off the gold standard. Now we're ruled by kleptomaniacal elitists. You would see it for what it is if you weren't one yourself.

ay you are the whiniest senior I have ever met. Had you managed your money better throughout your life you would be set. Instead you'll work until you die. Hopefully it'll be as a walmart greeter real soon.

I try to educate. For those who can't learn, we still live in a Darwinian society. Life has many twists and turns which you'll be learning the hard way as an inevitable consequence of the death of capitalism.

Parts of Europe already employ a mix of socialism and capitalism. If you haven't noticed several European countries have greater standards of living than we do. We are ranked 12th I believe. If people like you ruled America the elderly would be left to die in the streets. We need socialism to take care of those who can't take care of themselves.

death of capitalism.

#21 | Posted by Ray

Capitalism died in 1913.

We need socialism to take care of those who can't take care of themselves.

#22 | Posted by jackass

Like GM, Bank Of America, AIG.

No Lipz I'm thinking of Seniors, Disabled mentally and physically and those that have a bad run of luck. Get laid off and are out of work. Not Corporations.

Parts of Europe already employ a mix of socialism and capitalism. If you haven't noticed several European countries have greater standards of living than we do.

Socialism glorifies the confiscation of wealth; it has no means of creating wealth. It only appears to be working until it overwhelms the wealth created by capitalism. The rate of descent for each country varies with their balance sheet. Europe has the advantage of not being burdened with enormous military spending.

No Lipz I'm thinking of Seniors, Disabled mentally and physically and those that have a bad run of luck. Get laid off and are out of work. Not Corporations.

Like I keep saying, nothing destroys jobs more effectively than politicians. Jackass, you are unable to make connections with your ideology and the consequences of nationalized larceny.

Taxing people is a necessity, Having a safety net is too. You are incapable of understanding the consequences of not having one. Imagine all the people in Jersey that get section 8 housing being homeless. Society would collapse. Crime would go through the roof. Taxes are not larceny.

No Lipz I'm thinking of Seniors, Disabled mentally and physically and those that have a bad run of luck. Get laid off and are out of work. Not Corporations.

#25 | Posted by jackass

I must have not gotten the memo that said we were going from a 'family-based society' to a 'corporate/government based society'.

Bailout the American worker not corporations.

Taxes are not larceny.

#27 | Posted by jackass

Maybe, maybe not, depending on how they are used.

In the more socialistic countries in Europe, the people seem to be generally happy and content to pay half their earnings for the protections you describe. I don't know if that's a good idea or not.

I know this, and no one seems to want to talk about this, every one (minus one) of those countries have economies that cannot be sustained and each one that has socialized health care say that their HC system is going bankrupt. And in the one such system that is not bankrupt, taiwan, the doctors pay is severly limited, to where an average doctor can only make the equivelant of about $100k (american dollars) and the insurance companies have no right to set their own prices or make their own profits.

Good luck getting those ideas to pass. A socialized system will not work otherwise.

Taxing people is a necessity

Only to a point. Afterwards, taxes become counterproductive which is were we are now.

Having a safety net is too.

That's an individual responsibility. Amazingly, despite the excessive levels of taxation, Americans remain generous towards worthwhile charities. What the State takes, reduces what is available for charity.

You are incapable of understanding the consequences of not having one.

What the hell do you think I own gold for?

Imagine all the people in Jersey that get section 8 housing being homeless. Society would collapse. Crime would go through the roof. Taxes are not larceny.

Like hell not larceny! Both the State and common thugs employ force to take what they want. The crimes of government against its people surpasses anything possible in street crime. Who else could get away with taking half of what you earn on the specious grounds that it wiser in the management of money when it is hopelessly in debt?

Bailout the American worker not corporations.

Then kill the income tax!

And end the Fed!

And outlaw lobbying in our government.

Charity will never do what taxes can do. If it could we wouldn't have social programs to begin with. Charity would always be easier on people because it isn't compulsory and few would give 40% of their salary to charity..

compulsory and few would give 40% of their salary to charity..

#34 | Posted by jackass

And that's what socialism is all about. Compulsory.

But the economics don't work out. You simply cannot keep taking from the producers and keep giving it to the non-producers. Because invariable, the producers will stop producing because there is no incentive to produce.

This is exactly what atlas shrugged is about. The secondary theme is about what happens when the producers do stop producing. You have the USSR.

Charity will never do what taxes can do.

You are terrible naive. Charitable organizations are more careful about helping the truly needy. Government waste and corruption is unacceptably obscene and you're implicitly defending it. Politicians always put themselves first in the food chain.

And outlaw lobbying in our government.
#33 | POSTED BY LIPZOIDIAL

Rand proposed a constitutional amendment to separate commerce and state in the same way church and state are separated. But as we know, practical politics is dead set against eliminating state control of money.

SS, Medicare and Medicaid would have never been started if Charity was so great. Pull your head out your ass Ray.

Charity is a fraud. It only exists to make the privileged feel less guilty and allow them to whine about taxes. At the same time it demeans the recipient.

SS, Medicare and Medicaid would have never been started if Charity was so great. Pull your head out your ass Ray.

The funding for SS and Medicare is over $70 trillion in arrears. Their aim is political control; it has nothing to do with charity. I'm old enough to remember when medical services where affordable. Government subsidies and regulations put an end to that.

You suffer from a bad case of financial illiteracy. If you think 2009 was bad. Wait until 2010 comes.

Charity is a fraud. It only exists to make the privileged feel less guilty and allow them to whine about taxes. At the same time it demeans the recipient.
#39 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

Reminds me of when you complain how work demeans you.

Reminds me of when you complain how work demeans you.

#41 | Posted by Ray

Either you're getting Alzheimers, old man, or you just deliberately lie. Which is it?

"If you think 2009 was bad. Wait until 2010 comes."

If at first your DOW 1400 prediction doesn't pan out,
try try again. If it doesn't happen in 2010, just "upgrade" your prediction to 2011. And so on and so forth. That's Raystradamus in a nutshell.

Unemployment up. Check.
Bankruptcies up. Check.
Foreclosures up. Check.
Government spending out of control. Check.
Gold and silver up. Check.
Dollar down. Check.
One more to go.
A 50% correction does not end the bear market because corporate profits continue to deteriorate. It's only a matter of time before this market hits bottom.

Either you're getting Alzheimers, old man, or you just deliberately lie. Which is it?

Are you changing your mind? Is work no longer a form of slavery?

I missed one.
No economic recovery. Check.

For 2010.
The more government tries to fix the market in their own way, the more they'll fuck it up. Count on it.