Paul Ryan is a Marxist!

[Phatscotty]

There's a long string of "huh?" likes for Ryan. He likes Rands philosophy, but she turned hypocrite and basically took back everything that she said, he likes Rage, but Morello says that his pissed-off music is about Ryan, and he like Thomas Aquinas. The T.A. who hates women.

You can like someone even if you don't agree with everything they say.

For example, you are completely full of crap, but I still like you

[Phatscotty]

He likes Rands philosophy, but she turned hypocrite and basically took back everything that she said,

I've never heard this before, can you provide me with some details on this?

You trust what Phat Bottom will give you?

I'll trust it enough to read it, then research and form an opinion.

well, what he said is not the truth. It's totally a joke at the expense of the truth.

[Phatscotty]

Rand called people who receive welfare, Social Security, and other funds through such programs "vultures" and said that greed is what makes us great or some junk,... right?

Then she lost a fortune and spent her final years living on Social Security and Medicare.
I've said before that I don't know if Social Security allowed her to live in dignity; or if it caused her to lose her dignity.
I'm sure she would say something about how taking the money is ok because her point was that greed is good or something, but IMHO she fails.

So she didn't actually retract her comments as indicated in your post?

Actions speak louder than words. She didn't write any book retracting what she wrote or anything, she just went ahead and did everything she told us was wrong and parasitic to do.

Rand does not have to be perfect in order for her ideals and her philosophy she put forth to have merit. That's the worst argument ever, but I'm not getting into it further than that because this is all a joke anyways, and I only address this to point out the worst argument ever.

Like when a Christian tries to follow the Bible, and someone sees them do something that the Bible says don't do, and labels them a hypocrite forever......People do not need to be perfect in order to strive to be better and do the right thing.

[Phatscotty]

I answered your question; it's a trick question because she wrote fiction books to promote Laissez-Faire. I'm pretty sure that I cannot even find a quote of her directly criticizing welfare. The characters in her books do though. If you read Atlas Shrugged you'd understand what a moocher and a looter are. Laissez-Faire, her beloved form of capitalism, does not leave room for Social Security. Now, obviously she did do some talking too, but she didn't directly criticize a lot. All of her essays pretty much rehash her old arguments about capitalism, sex, and religion. If you're going to argue that she was not against Social Security or welfare then you're going to run up against not only the liberals here, but also the conservatives. It's no-man's land. And as Ayn Rand said, the middle ground is the most dishonest & evil or something.

I specifically redirected to you that it was a trick question because I know how you like to twist everything to match your antagonistic, anarchistic agenda. I had to make sure I put that there in the beginning for people who read through.

I'll rephrase my question to a single word if that helps.

Juan_Bottom wrote: Rand called people who receive welfare, Social Security, and other funds through such programs "vultures"
Saxi wrote: Where?

Don't stop now Saxi!!!

[patrickaa317]

Rand called people who receive welfare, Social Security, and other funds through such programs "vultures" and said that greed is what makes us great or some junk,... right?

Then she lost a fortune and spent her final years living on Social Security and Medicare.
I've said before that I don't know if Social Security allowed her to live in dignity; or if it caused her to lose her dignity.
I'm sure she would say something about how taking the money is ok because her point was that greed is good or something, but IMHO she fails.

So she didn't actually retract her comments as indicated in your post?

Actions speak louder than words. She didn't write any book retracting what she wrote or anything, she just went ahead and did everything she told us was wrong and parasitic to do.

Now, I did find something she did actually say.

It is obvious, in such cases, that a man receives his own money which was taken from him by force, directly and specifically, without his consent, against his own choice. Those who advocated such laws are morally guilty, since they assumed the “right” to force employers and unwilling co-workers. But the victims, who opposed such laws, have a clear right to any refund of their own money—and they would not advance the cause of freedom if they left their money, unclaimed, for the benefit of the welfare-state administration.

Her actions in this case make the words she spoke louder.

[Phatscotty]

You guys!

Juan is trolling ALL of you!

Listen to her words, not Phat Bottoms. The interviewer here trolls Ayn Rand in a similar fashion as well.

[Juan_Bottom]

Come on BBS and Saxi, you're just being too detail-oriented.

Ayn Rand clearly wrote "John Galt said, 'I hate sociale security.'" Rand spelled the word "social" incorrectly, which should not make JB wrong.

Ok, but what's a "moocher?" Or a "looter?" Or a "parasite?"

Rand does not have to be perfect in order for her ideals and her philosophy she put forth to have merit. That's the worst argument ever, but I'm not getting into it further than that because this is all a joke anyways, and I only address this to point out the worst argument ever.

I agree with you 100% but I want to be clear that my argument was about her, not about her ideas.

Her actions in this case make the words she spoke louder.

1) You can opt-out of Social Security.
2) She was also on Medicaid.
3) Both programs go against Lassaiz Faire.


I mean, you can say that she paid into it and deserved that "refund," but the fact lives on that she was a two-pack a day smoker who needed Medicaid & Social Security to pay her medical expenses. She had also said that one who accepts government control is 'delivering oneself into gradual enslavement' and she said 'there can be no compromise on basic principles.' Yet in the end she compromised her principles and accepted help under an assumed name. She couldn't do it on her own like she said.
So Ayn Rand asked Evva Pryror, a consultant, to enroll her on her behalf and to have it sent to an assumed name.

[Phatscotty]

She did specifically pay into the social security fund. She was just getting her own money back. That is the reason we pay into it. There is no problem with that, and that is exactly how it is supposed to work.

You would only have a point if she received corporate or public welfare.

[patrickaa317]

Perhaps you missed this part.

and they would not advance the cause of freedom if they left their money, unclaimed, for the benefit of the welfare-state administration.

[Juan_Bottom]

She did specifically pay into the social security fund. She was just getting her own money back. That is the reason we pay into it. There is no problem with that, and that is exactly how it is supposed to work.

You would only have a point if she received corporate or public welfare.

Like Medicaid?

[BigBallinStalin]

She did specifically pay into the social security fund. She was just getting her own money back. That is the reason we pay into it. There is no problem with that, and that is exactly how it is supposed to work.

You would only have a point if she received corporate or public welfare.

Oh, and many some sources too, but it's proving too much for JB to be intellectually honest.

Troll on, JB.

[Phatscotty]

but she was right that Social Security is a socialist program and if she were alive today she would identify it as the ponzi-scheme that it is

[Juan_Bottom]

[Juan_Bottom]

but she was right that Social Security is a socialist program and if she were alive today she would identify it as the ponzi-scheme that it is

She did hate SS, it's no secret. She hated government interference in anything. Of course, being part of post-depression generation should have given her a better perspective, I think.

But,
AynRand.org/her foundation did and does

By now it’s no secret that I think Social Security is an unjust monstrosity by which the elderly live off the work of younger generations. So what should be done about it?

The only moral solution—the only one that puts an end to the wealth redistribution and protects people’s right to keep what they earn—is to abolish Social Security entirely.

But she still needed Social Security to maintain her quality of life. Her conversation with her counselor and her law firm about greed and her need for SS benefits is pretty infamous and funny.

[patrickaa317]

Of course, being part of post-depression generation should have given her a better perspective, I think.

Actually, she was just under 40 years old when the depression ended, not part of the "post-depression" generation. "Post-depression" generation typically applies to people 20-40 years born after her.

I think I found the issue, you must be talking of a different Ayn Rand than the rest of us.