Atlas Shrugged

[Deborah]

And what pray tell is the government protecting if not against not so nice actions?

I suppose it depends on how some define "not so nice." There are those who condemn people with high salaries and want to re-distribute that which isn't theirs to those who haven't earned it; I consider that not so nice. My definition of not so nice, which the government should protect us from, includes theft, assault, murder, confiscation of property and encroachment from foreign enemies. So far the government has not only not done this but in some cases participates in the theft and certainly hasn't been successful in protecting us from foreign enemies on our own soil.

[frankenstein]

happy International workers day everyone! sorry just had too, I would not have remember what May 1st is but for an article about a group of hackers attacking iran right now as a tribute to the worker class of iran.

[thesometimesaint]

Deborah:

I have no problem with anyone making as much money as they see fit. Be another Bill Gates as far as I care. What I object to is the HOW some of that money is "earned". To oppress the hireling is one of the more grievous sin according to the Bible.

I've been in Priesthood Meetings where the Bishop will get up to podium and shout "A honest days' work" then whisper "for an honest days pay".

Ps.

We continue to talk about personalities—Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama—although the heads of state or elected officials in Congress have become largely irrelevant. Lobbyists write the bills. Lobbyists get them passed. Lobbyists make sure you get the money to be elected. And lobbyists employ you when you get out of office. Those who hold actual power are the tiny elite who manage the corporations. Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson, in their book “Winner-Take-All Politics,” point out that the share of national income of the top 0.1 percent of Americans since 1974 has grown from 2.7 to 12.3 percent. One in six American workers may be without a job. Some 40 million Americans may live in poverty, with tens of millions more living in a category called “near poverty.” Six million people may be forced from their homes because of foreclosures and bank repossessions. But while the masses suffer, Goldman Sachs, one of the financial firms most responsible for the evaporation of $17 trillion in wages, savings and wealth of small investors and shareholders, is giddily handing out $17.5 billion in compensation to its managers, including $12.6 million to its CEO, Lloyd Blankfein.

[Deborah]

I have no problem with anyone making as much money as they see fit. Be another Bill Gates as far as I care. What I object to is the HOW some of that money is "earned". To oppress the hireling is one of the more grievous sin according to the Bible.

What does it mean to oppress the hireling? If someone agrees to a certain job at a certain wage how is that oppression. He can negotiate his wage or go elsewhere.

When you talk about Lobbyists and their influence that is an entirely different issue and has nothing to do with Rand's philosophy; she would be against any such dealings. Rand's characters in fact paid their employees fair wages, higher than those in the union companies, as illustrated by Hank Rearden. AS condemned the government supported businessmen who were corrupt. The whole point of AS is for the government to get out of the way and let the producers produce and create the jobs and build the prosperity that all benefited from. Her heroes were not the corrupt businessmen you seem to think all heads of companies are.

[thesometimesaint]

Deborah:

No you can't. You can not live the American middle class lifestyle on Chinese wages.

http://bible.cc/malachi/3-5.htm

And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in [his] wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the stranger [from his right], and fear not me, saith the LORD of hosts.

https://lds.org/scriptures/bofm/3-ne/24.10?lang=eng

5And I will come anear to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the bsorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false cswearers, and against those that doppress the hireling in his wages, the widow and the efatherless, and that turn aside the fstranger, and fear not me, saith the Lord of Hosts.

Here is what Ayn Rand thought about the workers

The artificially high wages forced on the economy by compulsory unionism imposed economic hardships on other groups—particularly on non-union workers and on unskilled labor, which was being squeezed gradually out of the market. Today’s widespread unemployment is the result of organized labor’s privileges and of allied measures, such as minimum wage laws. For years, the unions supported these measures and sundry welfare legislation, apparently in the belief that the costs would be paid by taxes imposed on the rich. The growth of inflation has shown that the major victim of government spending and of taxation is the middle class. Organized labor is part of the middle class—and the actual value of labor’s forced “social gains” is now being wiped out.

[Deborah]

Here is what Ayn Rand thought about the workers

I'm not sure what your point is since I agree with her statement. The unions are responsible for jobs going overseas, and very clearly for the destruction of the steel and auto industries.

I have no idea what this means: "You can not live the American middle class lifestyle on Chinese wages."

[thesometimesaint]

Deborah:

It is a fundamental principle of economics that wages will always seek a lower level. IE; There is ALWAYS someone willing to work for less. So NO. Unions are not responsible for outsourcing. The ability of business to move to a lower wage area is, often receiving a tax break to do so, while the workers can not.

Try living your American middle class life style on a dollar or a day or less.

[Mordecai]

Orson Scott Card's, Why Union Leaders Are Trying to Destroy Themselves: http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2009-09-27-1.html

The union workers my uncle worked with were clearly defrauding United Airlines, driving up the price of tickets that passengers paid. Those electricians my friend apprenticed with were cheating the company that was paying for the building -- the costs would be passed on to the people using the building later. That infinitely slow closet-painting job came out of taxpayers' money.

(Keep in mind, Card is a registered Democrat, which makes it quite ironic that he's among my favorite political commentators, along with Newt Gingrich, Ron Paul and Mitt Romney).

Unions, initially, are typically good. But then they become corrupt, the longer they are around, not unlike big business and big government.

[WalkerW]

It is worth pointing out that historically the minimum wage law was supported by progressive economists due to its tendency to create job loss among the "unfit" and "undeserving" workers. It was economic eugenics.

See Thomas C. Leonard, David E. Bernstein, "Excluding Unfit Workers: Social Control Versus Social Justice in the Age of Economic Reform," Law and Contemporary Problems 72 (Summer 2009).

As for unions, see Thomas E. Woods, Jr., "Question 21: What Made American Wages Rise? (Hint: It Wasn't Unions or the Government.)" in his 33 Questions About American History You're Not Supposed to Ask (Crown Forum, 2007).

Random tidbit: Union membership has been steadily declining over the past 15 years.

[ERayR]

Random tidbit: Union membership has been steadily declining over the past 15 years.

But not in the auto industry which has now been brought to its knees and taken over by the government in colusion with said unions.

[Mordecai]

Union membership has been steadily declining over the past 15 years.

That's because union leadership is so untrustworthy and make for bad bosses. No one likes working for a corrupt boss.

[Jeff K.]

happy International workers day everyone! sorry just had too, I would not have remember what May 1st is but for an article about a group of hackers attacking iran right now as a tribute to the worker class of iran.

Your presumption is that somehow being against unions is the equivalent of being against workers. As a member of a union I have found that they do not represent my best interests, but rather the best interests of the political leadership. I celebrate international workers day in the sense that I hope to one day find an escape from closed shop mentality that would rather bring an industry to its knees for short term gain, rather than long term growth and cooperation.

Unions, like some forms of capitalism have thrown ethics to the wind in order to gain advantage in the economic sphere. When such occurs they become unethical and amoral. One wonders if your criticism of their acts is as strident as your criticism of Ayn Rand?

[WalkerW]

Unions = Satanism.

I win.

*tongue firmly in cheek*

[Jeff K.]

Deborah:

No you can't. You can not live the American middle class lifestyle on Chinese wages.

http://bible.cc/malachi/3-5.htm

And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in [his] wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the stranger [from his right], and fear not me, saith the LORD of hosts.

https://lds.org/scriptures/bofm/3-ne/24.10?lang=eng

5And I will come anear to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the bsorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false cswearers, and against those that doppress the hireling in his wages, the widow and the efatherless, and that turn aside the fstranger, and fear not me, saith the Lord of Hosts.

Here is what Ayn Rand thought about the workers

The artificially high wages forced on the economy by compulsory unionism imposed economic hardships on other groups—particularly on non-union workers and on unskilled labor, which was being squeezed gradually out of the market. Today’s widespread unemployment is the result of organized labor’s privileges and of allied measures, such as minimum wage laws. For years, the unions supported these measures and sundry welfare legislation, apparently in the belief that the costs would be paid by taxes imposed on the rich. The growth of inflation has shown that the major victim of government spending and of taxation is the middle class. Organized labor is part of the middle class—and the actual value of labor’s forced “social gains” is now being wiped out.

Allow me to illustrate how unions create difficulties.

When I first decided to teach, unions pushed for "voluntary" CLAD classes upon which everyone learned how to deal with multiple cultures. I approached the bureaucracy and explained how I was an immigrant and I was also a manager in several different countries and how my understanding of culture made such classes a waste of my time.

I was told that while my experience was good, it was not nearly as organized as the proposed classes. I took those classes and found they were taught by people who knew little of nothing of dealing with other cultures, and they taught systems of learning that were ridiculously outmoded and out of date. Much of the class dealt with little more than political indoctrination (which younger students often accepted uncritically).

Now why would a union push forward what is obviously a hardship on its membership? Could it be that the two years before tenure when the union could do nothing to protect new teachers (one can be dismissed at will). They still collected 800 dollars a year. The attrition rate and political indoctrination both combined to increase the coffers without increasing union responsibility. Very convenient.

The ethics, theoretically is to not only protect good teachers, but to help those who are poor teachers to get better or be removed (at least the union stated as much). The practice though is to make it too difficult to fire teachers, thus protecting long term poor teachers who are more stalwart towards the protection of the union, versus better teachers who wonder why the poor one's are still teaching.

All the while inflating wages and showing less results with each succeeding year.

Now, with the high pay that teachers recieve (70K plus a year), the extremely generous pensions of 70 to 90K a year for retired teachers which create a huge liability for the state we should ask ourselves. Is what the union is fighting for (continued raises, continued increased pensions, not just status quo) ethical? It doesn't improve teaching but it makes it more difficult for young teachers to teach. Is such ethical?

In my view it is not. But by law I must belong to the union, and only through a lie (for religious reasons) can I avoid the membership.

I see much truth in what Ayn Rand states in her description, even as I reject her amoral approach.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Deborah:

I have no problem with anyone making as much money as they see fit. Be another Bill Gates as far as I care. What I object to is the HOW some of that money is "earned". To oppress the hireling is one of the more grievous sin according to the Bible.

I've been in Priesthood Meetings where the Bishop will get up to podium and shout "A honest days' work" then whisper "for an honest days pay".

I think "I" am missing your point...

[Deborah]

They will be making Part 2 scheduled to be released in 2012.