[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k] [s4s] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/a/


File: atlasshrugged.jpg (30 KB, 324x470)
30 KB
30 KB JPG
Atlas Shrugged anime

-discuss
>>
Rearden is GAR.
>>
Well, Angelina Jolie is shooting in a Atlas Shrugged movie, actually.
>>
Epic failure. /thread
>>
A MAN CHOOSES
>>
>>10196159
Yeah, I heard about that. It's coming out this year.
>>
>>10196154
FUCK YEAH REARDEN
but apparently it's this guy in the upcoming movie

Not too bad.
>>
Atlas is a friend of the parasite. Don't be a friend of Atlas.
>>
fuck no, objectivism
>>
>>10196174
I really don't see this going well, unless they softly parody it.

but if it's "SWEAT OF YOUR BROW IS SERIOUS BUISINESS!" it'll suck.

of course, they'll probably just cut out most of the soapboxing, so it'll just be boring.
>>
jesus fuck I hate ayn rand
>>
Ayn Rand is a silly person with silly ideals.
>>
WOOULD YOU KINDLY PICK UP A KROWBEAR OR SOMETIN
>>
>>10196228
I have no idea how they're going to fit one of the longest books in modern history into a single fucking movie.
>>
I bet John Galt's 90 page-long speech would be a blast to animate.
>>
>>10196245
And no writing finesse.
>>
Kino no Tabi?
>>
Ignore the lies of Atlas and his parasites. /a/ is on the rise.
>>
DON'T BELIEVE IN YOURSELF

BELIEVE IN ME WHO BELIEVES IN THE SWEAT OF YOUR BROW WHICH BELIEVES IN A FIST FULL O LOIGHTNIN WHICH BELIEVES IN YOU
>>
>>10196255
If you cut out all the suck in Atlas Shrugged, it shouldn't be too hard a thing to do.
>>
Ayn r&
>>
FONTAAAAAINE!
>>
an anime definetly not, but a serious trilogy movie, maybe yes.
>>
>>10196245
From reading your posts, ideas, and personal philosophies, hearing that you do not like Ayn Rand comes as a bit of a surprise. You seem like a batshit insane philosopher to me.
>>
File: Amerika_novel.jpg (44 KB, 317x475)
44 KB
44 KB JPG
Here, have a better idea.
>>
Let's just make an anime of Bioshock instead.
>>
>>10196342
>batshit insane philosopher

yeah, those people all hate each other.
>>
>>10196342

He's MOE, Aynd Rand isn't.
>>
Francisco d'Anconia will be FABULOUS
>>
ANON CHOOSES! A MOD OBEYS!
>>
>>10196342
>batshit insane philosopher to me
Is there a sane variety?
>>
>>10196375
Plato.

Wait, never mind, I was forgetting the bit where his perfect state was based around the idea of convincing the rulers that they were gods and then trusting them not to think they were able to do whatever they wanted with the rest of the population.
>>
>>10196342
Uh no...

Don't you remember his socialist paradise idea?
>>
>>10196257
lol, I hope thats in the movie
>>
I think The Fountainhead would be a better anime. Not a series, but a few OVA's.

Roark, fuck yeah.
>>
Ayn Rand's ideas are nice because they can work in systems where everyone is an equally selfish dick rather than just those where everyone is perfectly selfless.
>>
>>10196411
a single movie would skip the 70% of the whole novel
>>
>>10196411
if we turn it into an action movie, the protagonist can shoot him while he's delivering the first page of it.

I'd pay to see that.
>>
File: Ayn_Rand1.jpg (19 KB, 288x358)
19 KB
19 KB JPG
What the fuck is with your guys obsession with Ayn Rand?
>>
>>10196342
Fuck no. while sharing some views, I can not tolerate her stance on a ton of issues.

For one, business is a form of control just like government. It needs to be fucking regulated, or money will own the people. This is not the only problem I have with her ideas. Fuck her. When individualism is rampant enough to dominate the plurality, it ceases to be individuality.
>>
>>10196432

People on the internet generally have personalities that naturally fit well with her ideas.
>>
>>10196447 When individualism is rampant enough to dominate the plurality, it ceases to be individuality.

That makes no fucking sense whatsoever.
>>
>>10196447
How does money own people?
>>
>>10196447
>When individualism is rampant enough to dominate the plurality, it ceases to be individuality
wat
>>
>>10196471
A preacher would say "when your desire for it outstrips your love for god and your fellow man". But I don't think that was what Cirno meant.
>>
>>10196452
I'm bracing for impact, but Cirno seems like the only opposition so far. However, considering the "licensing = evil" threads I always see, I'd be surprised if that many anons are in agreement with her philosophy.
>>
>>10196471
Go watch Kaiji
>>
>>10196471
Go watch Kaiji it explains it in a gun way.
>>
>>10196509
We say "licensing = evil" it's because licensers do a pretty shitty job and we would like to have them stop wasting our time and their money.
>>
>>10196471
Ever watch Speed Grapher?
>>
>>10196513
hahaha

First of all, evil old men like that probably don't exist. Second of all, Kaiji/all the other poor people were pulled into that because of their own will. They still had the choice whether to risk their lives or not.

There's a difference between temptation and control.
>>
>>10196509

Licensing is evil because they shit up shows and make our super-secret club available to the public.
>>
Randian beliefs are more retarded than Scientology.
>>
>>10196529
And then blaming us for their fail.
>>
File: coastguard-owned.jpg (47 KB, 640x480)
47 KB
47 KB JPG
>>10196471
this way

(sharks are ITT with ayn rand's society)
>>
>>10196557
That's logically impossible.
>>
>>10196536
what
>>
>>10196461
Then you should think. Business is a form of control just like anything else. A summarized version of my thoughts would be this:

Individuality only exists with choice, if a dominating form of control removes your choice, then you are no longer an individual. Control has to be limited.

I hope that makes it easier to understand. If not: Buy my book when I release it.
>>
>>10196536
lol

This is a perfect example of an argument against Objectivism.
>>
File: FKV.jpg (33 KB, 161x251)
33 KB
33 KB JPG
>>10196333
I like this one better. Although an anime version would really just be an adaptation of Evangelion.
>>
>>10196576

What? Absurdism?
>>
Say what you will about her ideas, but the storytelling was FUCKWIN. Seriously, /a/ watches shit about emo 13 year old boys piloting giant robots and loves it. Even if you don't like the moral of the story, it was a good piece of literature. I seriously think alot of people would finish this book if you could get them to read the first 30 pages, and I pulled up to the house about 7 or 8 and I yelled to the cabbie 'Yo homes smell ya later'
I looked at my kingdom I was finally there To sit on my throne as the Prince of Bel Air.
>>
>>10196566
No, I got the part where you were bitching about businesses. The part that makes no sense is the "Too much individuality makes it not individual anymore".
>>
>>10196566

DAMN YOUR SHITTY ADVERTISING!
>>
>>10196566

8/10
>>
>>10196566
Control the CONTROL!!!
>>
File: money.jpg (170 KB, 470x4318)
170 KB
170 KB JPG
>>10196447
Seconded on regulation. Ethics aren't in business anymore, people would enslave us if they could get away with it and make profit.

>>10196551
It's control, dude. People like that are all over the place, do you think that criminals are imaginary beings that don't exist in real life? Kaiji was conned into the debt and had his family threatened if he resist. He wanted to take care of things once and for all, so he persists. Get a job and then you'll understand how money runs everything.
>>
What the fuck is philosophy doing in /a/? Oh well.

>>10196566

No, business is not control. Business is an implementation of ability. You think that offering goods to people in exchange for money is controlling them? That is wrong. Control implies force.

You always have a choice. Businesses have no control over me, but I buy things because I want them. This does not remove my individuality.

Please, explain to me where "control" comes into place.
>>
>>10196566

CONTROL THE UNCONTROLLABLE! ROW ROW FIGHT THE POWA!
>>
>>10196626
Kaiji was a moron.
>>
>>10196635
Then I would have to say, what about businesses that provide necessities?

Wouldn't a business control your life then?
>>
>>10196635
Are you that unfamiliar with this subject?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly
>>
>>10196626
You are correct about the first part, but you've fallen off the track.

Kaiji's situation was not conducive with an ideal capitalist world. Criminal actions like that would be punished in a Randian society.
>>
Close this thread now before the pseudos break everything.
>>
File: ayn-rand-wtl_big.jpg (6 KB, 180x275)
6 KB
6 KB JPG
>>10196171
A slave obeys. Are you a man or a slave?
>>
>>10196662
idealist capitalism is just as much of an omegafail as Communism.
>>
>>10196635
The only way to not be under control by businesses would be to live on a fucking island and sustain a lifestyle there.

You depend on the economy for food, water, electricity, transportation, novelties, news, hygiene, and all that stuff. I mean, they have the right NOT to sell you something if they don't want to.
>>
Whoops, forgot my sage.
>>
>>10196670
it was already over once someone brought up Ayn Rand without a bioshock joke.
>>
>>10196660
They offer them by choice. Just because you need what they've created to survive, doesn't give them control over you. A doctor does not control me because he can save my life. If the doctor were to poison me, then charge me for the antidote, THAT would be an attempt to control. But, simply offering a service that is a necessity does not give you control over someone's life. It only allows them to exist, where before they could not.
>>
>>10196655

Nope. Both in the theoretical "I could go grow my own food" sense and in the practical "having to buy groceries does not take away my ability to make my own decisions" sense.

Ultimately, any complaint against free economics or monetary systems comes down to a complaint against the principle that people must work in order to live.
>>
>>10196682
>The only way to not be under control by businesses would be to live on a fucking island and sustain a lifestyle there.
Isnt that what Cirno is trying to do, or something?
>>
>>10196655
They offer them by choice. Just because you need what they've created to survive, doesn't give them control over you. A doctor does not control me because he can save my life. If the doctor were to poison me, then charge me for the antidote, THAT would be an attempt to control. But, simply offering a service that is a necessity does not give you control over someone's life. It only allows them to exist, where before they could not.
>>
Man, I have got to read this book.
>>
Why does every "Atlas Shrugged should be an anime" devolve into a debate about Objectivism?

I'm expecting deletion shortly.
>>
regulating business is the worst idea since someone said Lucky Star was better than Code Geass

when you regulate businesses, incentives to work are lowered, and you end up getting shitty products.

also another thing that is created by regulation is barriers to entry in a market, thus creating the opportunity for a monopoly to rise.

tldr, dont take your lessons in economics from Kaiji, because debt and borrowing money is basically what modern economics relies on.
>>
>>10196719
That's only if you don't assume that the drive for one's own self-preservation is ingrained into a person.
>>
>>10196702
Free economics opens up a whole nother can of worms. We've never in history seen a free economic society and as government regulations of business break down, so too do the ethics of the businesses.

complete deregulation of businesses would create something akin to EVE Online, except without the sci-fi stuff.
>>
>>10196748
oh hey, look at poor regulation in China...their products are top of the line, right?
>>
>>10196745

Because people love to argue, and this book is so easy to troll. The author was insane, but damn was she a storyteller, so the book sold.
>>
>>10196758

China meets a demand for cheap ass products by lower income people. Why do you think they are rolling in money? Its because due to US regulation and things like minimum wage and labor unions, labor in the US is many times more expensive here than in China.
>>
>>10196758
China has shitty workers to begin with.

lr2factors.
>>
>>10196749
The people who follow Randian beliefs are so batshit insane that they blindly believe anything that supports their argument. Look at all the idiots in this thread who are trying to justify dominating business.

OH THEY ARENT CONTROLLING ME BECAUSE I STILL HAVE CHOICE. FUCK GAS, I CAN WALK THE 50 MILE COMMUTE TO MY JOB. NO ONE IS FORCING ME TO BUY GAS
>>
>>10196817
That's why I was worried about necessities.
>>
>>10196795
Why do you think we need low-priced goods in the first place?

Because businesses don't want to pay decent wages or drop the prices of their product.

Only the elite of the elite in China are actually rolling in money. The rest of the people can barely afford food thanks to shittily regulated business operations and no worker organizations.

Why the fuck do you think the government had to step in and fix food prices? Because an economy doesn't work without some kind of regulations.

If people can't afford to eat, they sure as hell aren't going to be able to work very well.
>>
>>10196253
FIST FULLA LOITNIN
>>
>>10196817

No one is forcing you to buy gas, buy a bicycle or innovate a new form of transportation. Regulation never helped anyone.

Also, gas companies only have a monopoly now because of the heavy regulation and licensing given to gas corporations to ship the gas from countries like Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc.
>>
China has slave labor that supplies goods to inconceivably greedy corporate entities who tell them to use lead paint on toys to save a penny on production.
The US would be rolling in money too if that damn abraham lincoln hadn't of been around!
>>
File: Internet Fight.jpg (122 KB, 498x300)
122 KB
122 KB JPG
>>
>>10196845

Skilled laborers in the US shouldnt expect all this money for their work, ultimately they discovered that however stiff they held up against business (in unions) scab workers and other people were willing to undercut them in order to work. Thus they sought to artificially increase their pay through government regulation.

tldr, laborer's work isnt really worth shit, why should I care what they make? They try to sell it to the public as being "good for American industry," but it is really just making American products more expensive, and they expect me to cover the costs? Fuck that.
>>
>>10196863
The type of regulation is bad, not the regulation itself.
>>
Guys, your killing my memory of a good book here... and really, this topic began with somebody asking about an Atlas Shrugged anime.

WHEN THE HELL WAS ANIME OR IT'S MORALS EVER REALISTIC?

You can stand "BELIEVE IN YOU WHO BELIEVES IN YOURSELF", but you can't consider "BELIEVE IN YOUR TALENT THAT PRODUCES YOUR MONEY"?
>>
>>10196863
>buy a bicycle or innovate a new form of transportation.
Oh wow. You are so fucking dense.

Imagine an island with a thousand or so people. A monopolizing businessman has bought up all the land able to grow crops, and has purchased every animal. He increases the price of these goods to maximize his profits to the point where he loses quite a bit of sales, but makes up for it in net profit from the people still buying food at these inflated prices.

A large percent of the population are now FUCKING DYING OF STARVATION because of this bullshit. Enjoy your Ayn Rand, you god damn psycho.
>>
>>10196817
You aren't. gb2 subsistence farming.
>>
>>10196905
I have some bad news for you...they charge the same amount even if the manufacturing cost is 1/10th of what it would be in America.

Outsourcing doesn't actually reduce your costs, the only thing it does is increase profits.
>>
>>10196906
Yea, regulation is always bad, gives the government (LoL Lobbyists?) the power to grant monopolies.
>>
>>10196662
My point is that the problem IS the "ideal capitalist world". I think that capitalism is pretty far off of ideal, which I think is much closer toward socialism.
>>
>>10196948
YEAH LOL NO REGULATION IS PERFECT. IT LETS SHIT LIKE THIS HAPPEN >>10196937

Fuck off. Business needs to be regulated. Period. This shit should not be allowed to happen.
>>
>>10196937
wtf, he bought all the land? Not one person who owned land saw benefit from keeping their land and competing in the crop market?

Terrible example of monopolistic practices
>>
>>10196719
It isn't the doctor that poisons you, but the food that we eat and become fat and get diabeetus, and the government sure doesn't help, and then the doctor charges me money before he makes me feel better, when every other country gets care without being charged a medical bill.

That's control.
>>
>>10196991
You're assuming that any of these people can read, write, know how the economy works, be connected as to what's happening in the rest of the land market.
>>
>>10196991
Replace "one man" with "several men and their paid henchmen" and you have what would happen in a completely deregulated business world.

Wealthy men have an interest in staying wealthy, even if it means cooperating with people who may be their competitors in order to exploit the people under them.

Welcome to Capitalism.
>>
File: RED SON33.jpg (41 KB, 448x287)
41 KB
41 KB JPG
>>10196988
>>
>>10196991
You are a fucking idiot. You have the mind of a child if you think total freedom in any aspect is acceptable.

You probably think anarchy is a great idea.
>>
>>10196748
We have shitty products now because business isn't regulated. Why do you think lead was on all of those kids toys in China? Because Mattel was making a bigger profit producing there without regulation.

There's a dark side to capitalism, boy.
>>
>>10196943

They dont charge the same amount. Without Chinese manufacturing we'd all be paying huge fucking amounts for cheap things like old electronics and mass produced things like plastic products.
>>
>>10197028
>>10196937
Stop making sense in a thread where people try to justify the insane ramblings of Ayn Rand.
>>
>>10197040
So they used lead deliberately? Any half smart business knows that the publicizing of an unsafe product can kill them, as it has for Mattel's toy division. It wont happen again because of the free choice of toy products we have thanks to little regulation and low barriers to entry on that market, not thanks to this "regulation" which would make all these mistakes go away instantly somehow.
>>
>>10196863
Innovate a new form of transportation? Do we look like fucking scientists? We have a dependancy on oil on a global scale, that is why the middle east is such a shitstorm, because we need it.

Bush and Cheney run the companies that are taking the oil out of Iraq. Not as planned, huh?
>>
>>10196937
That man you speak of is fucking Dick Dastardly. He is a fiction. No man would do something like that, because such "horrible" business practices would fuck over him, in addition to everyone else.
You can't just make up a fantasy and use it as an example to prove a point.
"LOL HITLER COULD GET ELECTED PRESIDENT. ENJOY UR DEMOCRACY."
>>
ANDREW RYAN WAS RIGHT
>>
>>10197103
>No man would do something like that
No man would increase his profit by raising the prices of his goods and eliminating competition? Holy shit.

Are you mad?
>>
>>10197103
That isn't a fantasy, because it happens all the goddamn time in third-world countries.
>>
wow, this thread is still here huh?

For some reason, I don't care enough to argue anymore.
>>
/a/-Economics and Goverment
lol why is this still here?
>>
>>10197147
Then you lose. I officially declare myself the winner in favor of my side.
>>
>>10197103
Your straw man argument is shit. Democracy = majority rule. If everyone wanted Hitler to be president, it could happen.

On the other hand, thinking that people can't do this is stupid. The only reason why people DON'T do it is because of GOVERNMENT fucking REGULATION. Don't you remember the "fuck the common people" attitude of the 1800's?
>>
>>10197028

Your analogy fails in nearly every regard, ignoring importing, competition, land prices, the previous owners of the land, and other things like transportation. And sure, these "paid henchmen" might come and extort people or w/e, but that is why we have criminal systems, extortion and slavery are barely things that should be considered economically.
>>
>but that is why we have criminal systems

GOVERNMENT REGULATION
>>
-but that is why we have criminal systems

GOVERNMENT REGULATION
>>
File: just as planned.jpg (86 KB, 704x500)
86 KB
86 KB JPG
>>
>>10197192
>but that is why we have criminal systems
GEE I WONDER WHAT THAT IS?!
>>
>>10197211
Not necessarily, see US Consitution "Amendment 2"
>>
>>10197183
>>"fuck the common people" attitude of the 1800's
How's that electoral college treating us?
>>
>>10197042
Bullshit

>>10197103
You are in way beyond your element, Anonymous. Those people DO exist, what are you talking about? Daniel Plainview from There Will Be Blood isn't any different from people in reality who were in his position. the War on Drugs exists so that tons of people are rounded up, thrown into private prisons so they can make money and trade it on the stock market.
>>
>>10197243
It got Bush elected when Gore won the popular vote. The electoral college is an outdated shitheap.
>>
ITT: High school students who think Ayn Rand is sane.
>>
>>10197251
Bullshit? It's basic supply and demand and mass production.
>>
>>10197251
The War on Drugs is the epitome of government regulation, a group of morally driven people fucking with economy and people's desires just because they were given the power to do so.
>>
>>10197103
It's happened plenty of times all over the world.
>>
>>10197268
No shit I was pointing out the fact that the attitude never changed.
>>
>>10197271
Try Economics majors who thinks that the Nannie state mentality is the cancer that is killing the United States.
>>
>>10197271
She can't hardly be sane. She's dead.

Also:

This thread is an example of why competent ideological discussion on 4chan is a pipe dream.
>>
no man is an island
>>
>>10197251
the war on drugs exists because LOLOLOLDRUGZ R BAD. ie moral crusaders. and it was a standard running platform in the vietnam police action. 'keeping drugs off the streets, out of your kids' that kind of thing.
>>
>>10197324
"No island is a man."~Sir Cornela Williams, 1232
>>
>>10197285
Oh yeah. One form of regulation is bad, therefore all regulation needs to go away. That sure makes sense!

You are an extremist. An uneducated extremist, at that.
>>
>>10197333
So, what is an example of "successful" regulation?
>>
>>10197285
They tell the people that they're morally driven, when they turned around and kicked the Taliban out of Afghanistan (who had taken it over and ceased all heroin production), so we could resume heroin production and the CIA could bring over 80% of the America's heroin in our country.

It's a vicious circle, it's really quite tragic.
>>
>>10197365
I guess the law?
>>
>>10197380
The success of that system is arguable, last I checked the US prison system is one of our major government money sinks?
>>
File: tinfoil-hat.jpg (46 KB, 340x255)
46 KB
46 KB JPG
>>10197373
I thought the Free Masons controlled the heroin market under the guidance of the 13 Kings of Persia?
>>
>>10197310
Try: Rand supporters who can't form coherent arguments and need to resort to straw men.

No one here is saying the government should babysit us. But the people who are ignorant enough to follow Rands ideals believe they should let businesses do whatever they want.

>>10196937 <-- this is the result of zero regulation. No matter which way you look at it, no matter how you twist it, no matter how you try to justify it. Ayn Rand was a fucking lunatic.
>>
>>10197405
I don't know what to define as 'successful'. Non are perfect.
>>
>>10197352
They campaign under the notion that they're keeping kids safe, when drug dealers are the ones with the drugs, and since they aren't regulated by government, they don't ask for ID when selling meth or crack.

If the government decriminalized drugs and educated children on how they're dangerous and not how DRUGS ARE ILLEGAL AND BAD BECAUSE WE SAY SO, then they're be taking care of children.

Instead, they say that weed is as bad as meth or PCP. So a kid tries weed, likes it, thinks the government is full of shit and tried meth, because it can't be that bad, right? Then the kid is arrested and put in jail for possesion, and goes through withdraw behind bars.
>>
>>10197373
And all I hear is "trust the government!!" "regulation is good for consumers!!"

fuck that, if given the opportunity and correct amount of money, any government official will turn coat and be sold out, thus your regulation is just another form of control, which can be used by businesses to increase their profits to normally economically unsustainable levels
>>
>>10197365
Uh, Enron went down, didn't it?
>>
>>10197405
Proving that they're intent on keeping the world's largest prison population healthy and growing, for the sake of America's prosperity! USA!
>>
>>10197439
Justice is served.
>>
>>10197455
I suggest you petition your congressmen to bring back public hangings for all crimes.
>>
ITT: NO SYSTEM IS PERFECT, SO WE SHOULDNT HAVE SYSTEMS AT ALL!

ANARCHY IS AWESOME AND EDGY!
>>
>thus your regulation is just another form of control, which can be used by businesses to increase their profits to normally economically unsustainable levels

Isn't this just proving that businesses need to be watched more carefully, i.e. regulate harder
>>
>>10197407
If what I say isn't true, then would you believe anything Bush tells you over my words? Come on, use some critical thinking.
>>
>>10197442
They collapsed upon their own lies.
>>
>>10197442
Enron as a company was a product of regulation, so lets try again

>>10197408

you are full of shit, half your posts are "Rand is insane LOLOLOL"

businesses should be allowed to do whatever they want, because government regulation as an alternative fucks the system far more than any business has the potential of doing so.

the government is just another business, and all the government officials are in their positions for personal gain.
>>
File: 1205372373027.jpg (23 KB, 364x303)
23 KB
23 KB JPG
THE SWEAT OF MY BROW.

AREN'T I ENTITLED TO IT?
>>
>>10197491
I always love that rational. If the government is lies to you then the next rational, critical thought is a mass conspiracy involving the Legion of Doom.
>>
>>10197482

ITT: NO MIDDLEGROUND IS PERFECT, SO WE SHOULDN'T HAVE MIDDLEGROUND AT ALL!

EXTREMISM IS AWESOME AND EDGY!
>>
>>10197490

The free market, with competition allowed and encouraged is a better "regulator" than any government initiative
>>
>>10197516
No, business should never cause the death of a large percent of your population. Fuck off.
>>
>>10197512
GOD DAMN SLOICERS!!!!
>>
>>10197516

>>businesses should be allowed to do whatever they want, because government regulation as an alternative fucks the system far more than any business has the potential of doing so

bullshit. prove it.
>>
>>10197541

bullshit, prove it
>>
>>10197482
Thinks Anarchism started in the 70's/80's
>>
>>10197539
Everyone in this thread who isnt sucking the cock of Ayn Rand (I know she has one) is supporting middleground.

This thread is middleground vs uneducated extremists.
>>
>>10197516
>businesses should be allowed to do whatever they want
Child labor?
>>
>>10197541
no, not really. a truly "free market" means that one company with some prime material and real estate could turn into a katamari ball and start picking up smaller businesses left and right, and turn into a huge motherfucking conglomerate that owns 80 percent of the resources in an area and thus crushes mom 'n pop stores with their driving prices real low. Then, when the stores are all gone, they drive their own prices back up because they're the only competition.
>>
>>10197561
No you DISprove it! Reversal.
>>10197550
Yeah let the wars and political doctrine handle that.
>>
>>10197550
>>10197561

See the governments of basically every other country other than the United States.

Soviet Union's Lysenkoism
Soviet China's Great Leap
basically every dictatorship
Hitler
etc.

Governments are a piss poor way of feeling safe, businesses who's only aim is to please consumers and get them to buy their products are a far better way to feel safe.
>>
>>10197609
What's wrong with that? Brings in extra income for the family. No one forces them to work. Damn moralfags. gb2 to the war on drugs.
>>
>>10197541
>>10197616
You need to back up your own view, if you can't do that then you shouldn't open your mouth. So business should be able to run sweatshops right? That's what you are implying.
>>
>businesses who's only aim is to please consumers and get them to buy their products
there are plenty of businesses who don't care how they treat their customers
>>
the free market evangelist/randroid philosophy has the same root

some people think they're going to be rich someday. they think they're going to be the next warren buffet or bill gates. that's why they are encouraging the elimination of regulation, taxation, etc.
>>
>>10197621
All you did was prove that American Capitalism is better than the alternatives, which I agree.

Full-blown, unregulated capitalism is fucking dangerous. And it's been proven by this simple thought experiment. >>10196937
>>
>>10197621
Complete fantasy world.
>>
>>10197643
What's the matter too WEAK to defend yourself? gb2 to nanny states. I choose the impossible.
>>
>>10197629
Yea, seriously.

Should companies get bad publicity if they use children for laboring? Sure! But the level of publicity will be automatically balanced and taken to heart by the level of care by the people, rather than moralfags looking to get votes at the upcoming election.
>>
>>10197621

man, your logic sucks
>>
>>10197668

You dont prove things with thought experiments, try harder.
>>
>>10197621

lol gilded age.

>only aim is to please consumers and get them to buy their products

No, their only aim is to maximize profits. Ask any business professor. They only want to please the consumers as much as they have to in order to get the sales.

And when there are trusts like there were in the gilded age, they sure don't have to do much.
>>
>>10197668
This whole planet is dangerous. Just put in into a bottle. Worked for Superman.
>>
>>10197675
>But the level of publicity will be automatically balanced and taken to heart by the level of care by the people, rather than moralfags looking to get votes at the upcoming election.

you are way too optimistic. The people don't care about this shit anymore, they're tired of getting fucked in the ass so they just lie there and take it.
>>
>>10197621
Hahaha. Keep your US. I'm happy with my Canada.
>>
>>10197629

yeah, fuck school, fuck education, just have the kid work

man, are you people fucking stupid? what you people want are working conditions straight out of the 19th century.
>>
>>10197672
If you read the thread, I made my points perfectly clear, business only care about money, not about humans or their rights.

Business have too much power, hire illegal immigrants and fuck over the same people that they sell their shitty products to. America has too much useless crap.
>>
>>10197702

We have fucking Aristotle here I guess, think hard and dont observe situations in practice?

I guess heavier objects fall faster than lighter objects?
>>
File: 1205373102630.jpg (21 KB, 355x355)
21 KB
21 KB JPG
>>10197702
Counter palm. Well that was easy.
>>
>>10197621
>who's
I missed this.

It appears we are actually arguing with children. End thread. It's not like their opinion matters.
>>
>>10197732
>>human
>>rights
lol completely made up.
>>
>>10197749
This thread doesn't end until I say so.
>>
>>10197732

Businesses only care about the money that consumer's have, therefore they will do their best to meet their needs.

You need to read some Adam Smith, "The Wealth of Our Nation"
>>
>>10197764
>therefore they will do their best to meet their needs.
Including killing the poorer 25% of the population if it means maximizing profit from the remaining 75%
>>
>>10197705
You make contracts with businesses for services. You're not born into those contracts. You have to make them purposefully and by your own decision. No matter how desperate you are, you can still choose to die.

Governments contract you at birth, because it's assumed that you belong to them. The nationstate principle. You're a part of the nation, so you belong to the state that represents that nation. You have no choice what terms it wants to impose.

Businesses don't have armies to back them up. Businesses live in fear of retribution by courts and even citizens with fire and pitchforks.

Governments have armies. They don't fear their own populace. Especially totalitarian governments that conscript their armies and ideologically brainwash their entire populace.

Government is inherently more dangerous on every level, because government is a business that has no rules but its own, a monopoly on force, and the desire only to perpetuate itself at the expense of every possible sacrifice it can make to what it oversees.
>>
>>10197789
Those people sucked anyway. Good for nothing Irish men.
>>
>>10197740

Technically they do. It's just not really measurable because it's an infinitely small difference.
>>
>>10197749

Yup, end of argument since you cant refute points.
>>
>>10197764

my bad,

*Wealth of Nations
>>
randroids/free market evangelists are in love with black/white fallacies

either you have this fantastical freedom they masterbate over or you have ubergovernment whose only aim is to come down hard on the golden-skinned achievers while propping up all the lazy deadbeats.
>>
I see no difference between a "free market" economy government and monarchy. You're pretty much at the whim of a monopoly in the worst case scenario, and the king also has the power to raise things like taxes for his own gain. Both can stretch the people to their breaking point without starving them. In the businesses' case, they need the consumers to make money, so they look at consumers like chickens, and economically stick them in cages for them to shit out their eggs.
>>
>>10197789
I dont see any situation where that would truly be economical, perhaps you would like to delve into the specifics rather than say "LOL THEY KILLED LOTS OF PEOPLE GOVERNMENT HELPPP!!!"
>>
>>10197798
>Businesses don't have armies to back them up. Businesses live in fear of retribution by courts and even citizens with fire and pitchforks.

Private armies. I've seen companies hire these. Also, buy out the courts.
>>
look at how well your anarchy is working in somolia, anarchists/randroids.
>>
>>10197815
In a free market, there are no monopolies, try again please.
>>
Most airline accidents are caused by negligence in the maintenance facilities caused by over crowding hangers, putting immense pressure for maintenance crews to speed up their work at a cost of actually doing a thorough job and actually missing a few minor errors.

This is how business operates, it's not about providing services to people, but rather making money. Governments are about power and in order to maintain power you make the trains run on time. Being a government means you provide services in order to maintain your power. This is why i'll always trust a government over a business.
>>
>>10197870

>>In a free market, there are no monopolies, try again please.

o_o

you are a fucking dumbass.
>>
>>10197896
Why dont you give me a well documented occurrence in history?
>>
>>10197869

The epitome of government driven colonization by Britain? Please...
>>
>>10197838
>I dont see any situation where that would truly be economical
HUUUUUUUUURRRRRRRR >>10196937
>>
>>10197902

SOUNDS LIKE SOMEONE DOESNT KNOW WHAT THE FREE MARKET IS
>>
>>10197895

it's anarchy, dumbshit. care to move the goalposts any further?
>>
It's fun, even though I'm not american, I felt like reading this book, just yesterday I finished the No-contradiction part.

Anime would be shit.
>>
>>10197838
What he means is situational. Say you lived on a planet with a few thousand other people. There was one water source in the main town. Of course, people from all over use this place. Then, the business charges more than it usually does. It becomes unaffordable for a certain part of the population, so they die. The rest of the population's paying more for this water makes up this gap in "cash cows" and actually give surplus money to the business.
>>
>>10197908
>Why dont you give me a well documented occurrence in history?
Because luckily no one is FUCKING STUPID enough to adopt Ayn Rands bullshit.
>>
File: 1205373737191.jpg (41 KB, 640x480)
41 KB
41 KB JPG
>>10197915
>>
File: 1205373777377.jpg (236 KB, 800x1007)
236 KB
236 KB JPG
Externalities don't exist am i rite?
>>
>>10197915

SOUNDS LIKE YOUR LOGIC DOESN'T FUCKING FOLLOW

SOUNDS LIKE "HOW THE FUCK DO YOU COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT FREE MARKETS PREVENT MONOPOLIES"
>>
>>10197864
The powerful may prey on the weak. This is a fact of nature.

There's no such thing as a perfect society or system. Power is always the guiding principle. Physical, intellectual, or conceptual power. Everyone is in the end ruled by something.

I would rather put my eggs in the many baskets of corporations, entrepreneurs, businessmen, workers, and individuals with lesser power singular power, than I would in the hands of a hydra called government which answers to no one, not even its own populace, and which seeks only to expand itself further into the lives of innocent people so that paid bureaucrats who produce nothing of value to the economy can seem important by passing more regulation and rules to increase their own importance and consolidate their own authority.

Lesser evils in an evil world. In an ideal setting, citizens, economic interests, and government should all be at each other's necks in order to restrict the other, not working to consolidate authority with one.

Controlled chaos is the way life works. Consolidated authority is the death of all excellence.
>>
>>10197916
Anarchy caused by government interference, Africa was developing well until the Anglo Saxons came and drew borders. And the US still ships weapons to that part of the world, and still supports African dictatorships with "AIDS" money, so try again faggot.
>>
>>10197955
A free market is a market in which prices of goods and services are arranged completely by the mutual consent of sellers and buyers. By definition, in a free market environment buyers and sellers do not coerce or mislead each other nor are they coerced by a third party.[1] In the aggregate, the effect of these decisions en masse is described by the natural law of supply and demand. Free markets contrast sharply with controlled markets, in which governments directly or indirectly regulate prices or supplies, distorting market signals.[2] In the marketplace the price of a good or service helps to quantify its value to consumers and thus balance it against other goods and services. In a free market, this relationship between price and value is more clear than in a controlled market. Through competition between vendors for the provision of products and services, prices tend to decrease, and quality tends to increase.

Free market economics is closely associated with laissez-faire economic philosophy, which expands this environment by confining government intervention to market failures. Hence, with government force limited to a defensive role, government itself does not initiate force in the marketplace beyond levying taxes in order to fund the maintenance of the free marketplace. Some free market advocates oppose taxation as well, claiming that the market is better at providing all valuable services of which defense and law are no exception, and that such services can be provided without direct taxation. Anarcho-capitalists, for example, would substitute arbitration agencies and private defense agencies.
>>
>>10197974
It's still anarchy. Does matter what "Made In" stamp is on it.
>>
look, we already know what happens in a situation where businesses are unrestrained

It's called the Gilded Age and the resulting Depression. Guess what we figured out? Modern governments should be a mix of capitalism and socialism durrrrrr.

NO ONE should be arguing either extreme anymore really.
>>
>>10197974

THOSE GOALPOSTS, YOU SHALT NOT MOVE THEM
>>
>>10198032
With AYN RAND MAGIC of course.
>>
tl;dr
>>
>>10197962
>>government which answers to no one, not even its own populace, and which seeks only to expand itself further into the lives of innocent people so that paid bureaucrats who produce nothing of value to the economy can seem important by passing more regulation and rules to increase their own importance and consolidate their own authority.
Don't judge all governments by the present US federal government. In many other countries the system still works, or is not broken to anywhere near the same extent.

All government is ultimately answerable to the people, whether through voting or revolution. The US voting population just fails it.
>>
>>10198032

WITH THE POWA OF MONIES
>>
>>10197988
>in a free market environment buyers and sellers do not coerce or mislead each other nor are they coerced by a third party.
how the fuck do you enforce this
>>
>>By definition, in a free market environment buyers and sellers do not coerce or mislead each other

so that would make no market free, because misleading people is something that happens in human interaction

otherwise..

1) "it is because it is" isn't a great way of defining something

2) that definition, funny as it is, doesn't indicate how a free market would prevent a monopoly
>>
>>10198008
Just because it was done WRONG doesn't mean it can't be tried again. Anyway the Gilded wasn't a true free market anyway.
>>
>>10198008
"Reforms" did more to hurt the recovery from the Great Depression than it did to help it.
>>
>>10197103
This thread ended all the way back here folks, Godwin's Law in action.
>>
>>10198070

Yea, Keynesian economics is still ruining the country.
>>
>>10198074
Thread ended before it started. We're just having fun.
>>
>>10198069

>>Gilded wasn't a true free market anyway.

guess no one is a true scotsmen, then
>>
File: 1205374278957.jpg (9 KB, 428x253)
9 KB
9 KB JPG
>>10197988
>>private defense agencies.
Because we all know they're doing great things in Iraq hey?

Mercs > EVIL SOCIALIST GOVERNMENT SOLDIERS WHO HATE OUR FREEDOMS am i rite Randists?
>>
The Federal Reserve just devalued US Dollars today, enjoy your money printing "Government Regulation" made for the banking industry.
>>
>>10198107
Nope. There's a reason great men moved under the sea.
>>
>>10198070
debatable, though that's mostly revisionists advancing a laissez faire agenda

you really can't deny that social security and policies like the Glass Stegal act calmed the spikes of Captialism, effects which are measure beyond the 30's and 40's
>>
>>10198129

Blackwater did *exactly* what the government paid them to do, hence the concept is still economically viable.
>>
>>10198137
I'm not. That's why I choose the impossible.
>>
File: 1205374392736.jpg (55 KB, 450x450)
55 KB
55 KB JPG
>>10198145

some GL for your bioshock reference
>>
>>10198152
WW2 solved all the problems everyone knows that. All the rest of the crap only put chewing gum that we're paying for now.
>>
The Fed's Historic Innovation
With a $200 billion plan to ease the credit crunch, a 21st century economy is getting the 21st century monetary policy it requires

by Michael Mandel

Throw out all the econometric models—we are now officially into uncharted territory.

For the last quarter-century, the Federal Reserve has basically used one tool—the Fed funds rate—to run monetary policy. When the economy was running too hot, the Fed raised rates. When the economy was running below potential, the Fed cut rates. It was simple, and at the core, straightforward.

But today's announcement by the Fed is something very different: a window into a newfangled world where monetary policy is as innovative as the financial markets. Over the past 25 years, Wall Street wizards have moved away from plain-vanilla equity and debt, and constructed a staggering array of derivatives and other new forms of financial instruments. But while these instruments have been highly beneficial for growth, economists and policymakers have repeatedly worried about a major financial crisis triggered by out-of-control derivatives.
Great, we call printing money "Innovative" now? Fucking government regulation...
>>
Thoughts on the matter:

- Atlas Shrugged was not a bad book. I disagree with the majority of her ideas, but she is not a bad writer. John Galt indeed.

- Some people should read up a bit more on objectivism beyond Bioshock

- I think it's well established that no one system is perfect, Objectivism has it's faults and its merits just like every other concept out there. Saying it's flat out wrong (or batshit insane, as a certain number would like to put it) is just as bad as saying it's perfect.
>>
>>10198237
>>Some people should read up a bit more on objectivism beyond Bioshock
Waste of time. All the cool stuff was packed into that game.
>>
>>10198237

John Galt is terrible. Characters made of crystal perfect ideals are shit.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.