Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No ... Greenspan is a very intelligent man. The intellectually challenged parrots to which I spoke of consist of those who promote the propaganda to which Greenspan and many others were sources for decades. While this could lead the thread astray, the connection between Rand and Greenspan does allow for a limited discussion in this area, and still remain on topic.
The first point is that Greenspan has been speaking from both sides of his mouth for 40 years or more ... and while I understand the point you are driving at ... that it was Rand's faulty philosophy embraced by Greenspan of a free market economic model unencumbered by government regulation which Greenspan later confessed was an error and to blame for the financial crisis, that too is simply propaganda from the most tenured member of the financial oligarchy operating under the Orwellian name "Federal Reserve". I say Orwellian, precisely because the FED is no more Federal than Federal Express, and there is no "Reserve". It was originally designed as a ponzi scheme fraud, and has never been anything else but that for it's entire existence. That Greenspan was the Chairman for so many years identifies him as part of the problem, rather than some all-wise savior as he has so often been anointed.
The fact is, you and so many others opine based on a complete misunderstanding of Rand's position, which I readily admit is an easy error to make, and also an easy point of Rand's ideology to deliberately distort for those who have done so repeatedly. But, given what I understand of Rand's general unregulated economic philosophy, she was "mostly correct", but in error in one specific assumption. The assumption in error was the possibility of a free market economy while a monopolistic entity such as is the FED had complete control of the life's blood of that economy ... namely the control of currency and liquidity and interest rates. If capital is controlled by monopoly ... no free market can possibly exist, by definition. Since markets rely on capital, those that control that capital ultimately control the markets, rendering them anything but free. This monopolistic control of the markets using the control of capital to achieve that control is actually the antithesis of Rand's ideological position of free markets, because controlling and manipulating those markets was her objection. It doesn't matter "who" controls those markets, be it government or a private consortium such as the FED Bankers/Financiers .. the operative point is that they are controlled, and thus, not the least bit free. Do you follow me?
Now, i don't know this to be true or false for certain, and is just my perception of Rand's view ... that she was speaking of markets free of government regulation in the sense of not allowing government to manipulate the markets, hence picking the winners and losers through the vehicle of "regulation". I don't believe for a moment that Rand was suggesting that the Markets could do as they please, immune to laws governing their behavior, as she was not so naive as to believe that criminal behavior within those markets could be tolerated and left unchecked by laws, while remaining sound. I seriously doubt Rand would advocate the allowing of criminal corruption within the markets.
Many other points Rand's detractors deliberately distorted such as her philosophy of "Self Interests" and "Objectivism" ... but here is Rand, in her own words, defining her core beliefs:
My philosophy, Objectivism, holds that:
Reality exists as an objective absolute—facts are facts, independent of man’s feelings, wishes, hopes or fears.
Reason (the faculty which identifies and integrates the material provided by man’s senses) is man’s only means of perceiving reality, his only source of knowledge, his only guide to action, and his basic means of survival.
Man—every man—is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.
The ideal political-economic system is laissez-faire capitalism. It is a system where men deal with one another, not as victims and executioners, nor as masters and slaves, but as traders, by free, voluntary exchange to mutual benefit. It is a system where no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force, and no man may initiate the use of physical force against others. The government acts only as a policeman that protects man’s rights; it uses physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use, such as criminals or foreign invaders. In a system of full capitalism, there should be (but, historically, has not yet been) a complete separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church.
The most abused tactic of distortion of these points is the constant allegation of selfishness and egoism in this view of "self interests" as the primary duty one has to one's self. This of course is totally contrary to the philosophy long promoted by the left of "Altruism" where we all should think of others before ourselves, because this is the most high minded way to look at the world. The underlying reality is that those who have long controlled the economy WANT YOU TO BUY INTO this idea that it is wrong to think of yourself and your self interests over the collective interests. You've been trained to accept graciously that to which causes you to suffer because it is ultimately for the good of the many that you must endure your share of sacrifice. But if EVERYONE is sacrificing ... who is the beneficiary of all that sacrifice? EXACTLY ... the very ones selling you this bill of goods ... this collectivist crap that has trained you to ignore your own best interests for the sake of others.
Rand understood the deviousness of this mindset ... this pure asinine tripe for what it was. Furthermore, when Rand spoke of "self interests" ... she included the terms "rational" and "ethical", meaning that you attend to your best interests without harming others interests, or gaining at the expense of others. To use an analogy, look at it in the same sense that airlines instruct their passengers in how to behave during a decompression of the aircraft ... they instruct you the adult to first affix your oxygen mask to yourself, and then attend to your children's masks. OH MY GOD ... WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN ??? HOW SELFISH!!! No ... the logic behind this is, if the parent were to lose consciousness from lack of oxygen as she fumbled with masks for the two kids ... then she can be of no help to them, and all three would suffocate. It's just pure logic and while appearing selfish initially, is in fact in keeping with the best interests of all.
Another aspect of this very same mindset of altruism to which Rand objected was "collectivism" which is one of the central themes of the left wing ... and extends to each of our rights and liberties as individuals. This is another slight of hand by the authoritarian left, wanting you to agree to give up some of your rights for the benefit and safety of all. This idea that the interests of the collective takes precedent over the individual is one of the greatest "mind fracks" ever promoted. The reality is, this so called "collective" is nothing more than a collection of individuals, and the only rights that exist are that which belong to the individual. You cannot protect the best interests of this collective by eliminating each member's rights and liberties ... this is just another slight of hand by the authoritarians who want you to relinquish your rights for THEIR benefit.
This is what Ayn Rand's philosophy entails ... and it is absolutely true and profound wisdom.
Alpha - I have found better tools at Lowe's for similar prices. We are not likely to buy our next set of household appliances at Sears either. Their loss.
They also had appliances "diehard" and other brands that people liked, oddly. Craftsman wrenches might not break too often but they spread. Eddie basically kills companies. He cuts inventory. Its a great short term trick that kills it long term.That is exactly how he runs his auto parts stores. So when I went to Sears, and they didn't have something in stock, I knew Eddie worked his magic and never went again. He just short lines it and is just selling off the real estate and other assets. He gave upon the retail end a long time ago.
How about instead of stroking your own pseudo-intellectual pole you look up some real ammo instead of clinging to some obtuse philosophy from a novelist that a suit supposedly adhered to??
Since he's been "head"...he put double the amount of earnings into stock buybacks instead of investing into capital improvements...
Now anybody who operates under the principle of the "invisible hand" knows that competition is key and you DON'T "outcompete" by NOT reinvesting or underinvesting into your product.
But yea....don't let the fact he didn't adhere to free market principles take the blood out of your boner
I knew sooner or later I'd get to the truth. Thanks.
I was just thinking that we had been waiting a little longer than usual for the "The philosophy is perfectly sound, they just implemented it wrong!" post.
No stretch. Greenspan admitted that his ideology from Ayn Rand is what guided his mistaken pursuit of deregulation of banking which caused the economic collapse of 2008.
Congress and mainstream economists couldn't understand Greenspan's sophistry. So you are going to take anything this man says at face value?
In addition, Greenspan didn't deregulate everything....he cherry picked.
Put it like this, if deregulation was a journey into the wilderness...then Greenspan wasn't even Chris McCandless.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
