I got laid off so I'm on unemployment ATM. There are too many hours in the day now while I write applications and wait for calls. Its downright boring.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Anyone read the Fountainhead
- Thread starter Zorth41
- Start date
- Status
I got laid off so I'm on unemployment ATM. There are too many hours in the day now while I write applications and wait for calls. Its downright boring.
This is a horrible generalization and a lame rationale to dismiss the views of those who don't like the books. What stats do you have about 'so many people' to actually back this up?
I read the book many years ago before I spent a lot of time in the working world. My dislike of Rand's philosophies and views took root over the last 10 years when I had a much better perspective on what it takes, in a practical sense, to make progress in the real world and the societal foundations upon which that progress is enabled and fostered (or disabled and discouraged).
I know little of the woman and have only read her bio once or twice so I have no basis to like or dislike her. I do disagree strongly with her views as espoused in Atlas Shrugged.
As plots go, it's not a bad read. Rand's characters were interesting and well-developed. Her plot structure kept me engaged as well - enough mystery and tension building to be intriguing.
In MY world, I'm always right. However, if anyone spends all of their time in THEIR world, they're usually labeled as 'crazy' and nobody listens to them..........
I've said and posted it before- I'd like the extremists to pound sand and let the ones in the middle work out some agreements.
But even the dumb ideas sound good, to someone. Middle ground doesn't need to be a narrow strip at dead center. Some Liberal or Conservative ideas are fundamentally good, but they may need some massaging to get them to appeal to a larger group. The ACA is a good example- some think it's great, right out of the box and some hate it, while others think it could work, with modifications. At one end, it helps one group, at the opposite, it helps another. With mods, it helps most.
The only good thing about being in that position is the amount of time to think about one's options and even then, nobody wants to think about that 100% of the time. Good luck in the search.
I'm not dismissing anyone's views. If someone doesn't like it, that's OK. if they were to try forcing me to agree, I'd have a problem with it.
If you're interested, Netflix has a segment about Atlas Shrugged, with interviews.
Agreed. I think that extremist positions are invariably wrong because they're wrong, not because they're extreme.
47 million of the 317 million living in this country are on Food Stamps. That's 18% of the population, and I think that qualifies as "gobs". And that's JUST Food Stamps!
I worked for 14 years in the field of disability. I will not comment on your disability as I do not know you. I will say however that the VAST majority of people who received, or applied for disability benefits believed wholeheartedly that they were 100% disabled simply because they couldn't do the type of work they used to do, ie: their never ending focus was on what they couldn't do, not on what they could do.
I had a very long response posted but edited it because it veered too far off topic even for OT.
Peace.
I will add that I now have no intentions of reading anything by Ayn Rand out of fear I will become an unfeeling bot programmed by her books and then start agreeing with the d-bags I hear on the radio, and believing the crap they make up.
I read Atlas Shrugged and Fountainhead years ago in college, and this sums it up to me:
Rand's philosophy posits an oversimplified dichotomy between a society based purely on individualism and one based purely on collectivism. Neither extreme has worked or will ever work in the real world. Even in the U.S., which is the prime example of an individualist system, in the early days of capitalist industrialism there were government subsidies in the form of free land for railroads, tariffs to protect domestic industries, farm subsidies, etc. Needless to say, in today's economy subsidies are rampant for the well to do as well as the needy. I would like to see many of those subsidies disappear, especially for those who don't need them, but that is a heavy political lift for sure. If philosophies like Rand's encourage us to remove some of the most egregious subsidies, especially for the rich, then that is fine, but those virulently opposed to subsidies seem to go right to things like medicare and food stamps. I find that revealing as to their true intent.
Rand's philosophy posits an oversimplified dichotomy between a society based purely on individualism and one based purely on collectivism. Neither extreme has worked or will ever work in the real world. Even in the U.S., which is the prime example of an individualist system, in the early days of capitalist industrialism there were government subsidies in the form of free land for railroads, tariffs to protect domestic industries, farm subsidies, etc. Needless to say, in today's economy subsidies are rampant for the well to do as well as the needy. I would like to see many of those subsidies disappear, especially for those who don't need them, but that is a heavy political lift for sure. If philosophies like Rand's encourage us to remove some of the most egregious subsidies, especially for the rich, then that is fine, but those virulently opposed to subsidies seem to go right to things like medicare and food stamps. I find that revealing as to their true intent.
- Apr 1, 2000
- 17,398
- 9,827
- Disclosures
- Endorsing Artist: Roscoe Guitars, DR Strings, Aguilar Amplification
- Status
