The relevance of Atlas Shrugged today
16 January 2009
There was a very interesting editorial about Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged in the recent Wall Street Journal. Here are some excerpts:
For the uninitiated, the moral of the story is simply this: Politicians invariably respond to crises — that in most cases they themselves created — by spawning new government programs, laws and regulations. These, in turn, generate more havoc and poverty, which inspires the politicians to create more programs . . . and the downward spiral repeats itself until the productive sectors of the economy collapse under the collective weight of taxes and other burdens imposed in the name of fairness, equality and do-goodism.
…
These acts and edicts sound farcical, yes, but no more so than the actual events in Washington, circa 2008. We already have been served up the $700 billion “Emergency Economic Stabilization Act” and the “Auto Industry Financing and Restructuring Act.” Now that Barack Obama is in town, he will soon sign into law with great urgency the “American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan.” This latest Hail Mary pass will increase the federal budget (which has already expanded by $1.5 trillion in eight years under George Bush) by an additional $1 trillion — in roughly his first 100 days in office.
…
In one chapter of the book, an entrepreneur invents a new miracle metal — stronger but lighter than steel. The government immediately appropriates the invention in “the public good.” The politicians demand that the metal inventor come to Washington and sign over ownership of his invention or lose everything.
The scene is eerily similar to an event late last year when six bank presidents were summoned by Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson to Washington, and then shuttled into a conference room and told, in effect, that they could not leave until they collectively signed a document handing over percentages of their future profits to the government. The Treasury folks insisted that this shakedown, too, was all in “the public interest.”
…
One memorable moment in “Atlas” occurs near the very end, when the economy has been rendered comatose by all the great economic minds in Washington. Finally, and out of desperation, the politicians come to the heroic businessman John Galt (who has resisted their assault on capitalism) and beg him to help them get the economy back on track. The discussion sounds much like what would happen today:
Galt: “You want me to be Economic Dictator?”
Mr. Thompson: “Yes!”
“And you’ll obey any order I give?”
“Implicitly!”
“Then start by abolishing all income taxes.”
“Oh no!” screamed Mr. Thompson, leaping to his feet. “We couldn’t do that . . . How would we pay government employees?”
“Fire your government employees.”
“Oh, no!”
Abolishing the income tax. Now that really would be a genuine economic stimulus. But Mr. Obama and the Democrats in Washington want to do the opposite: to raise the income tax “for purposes of fairness” as Barack Obama puts it.
David Kelley, the president of the Atlas Society, which is dedicated to promoting Rand’s ideas, explains that “the older the book gets, the more timely its message.” He tells me that there are plans to make “Atlas Shrugged” into a major motion picture — it is the only classic novel of recent decades that was never made into a movie. “We don’t need to make a movie out of the book,” Mr. Kelley jokes. “We are living it right now.”
Wow. What else can you say?
What use is a government “stimulus”?
21 December 2008
Our politicians are simply unable to resist these insane stimulus packages even though there is ample theoretical and historical evidence of them hurting the economy and prolonging downturns. This video from the Center for Freedom and Prosperity is worth watching.
Abortion and the Zen of Motorcycle Maintenance
13 December 2008
Recently I borrowed the audio version of the celebrated book from 1974 titled: “Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance” by Robert Pirsig. Parts were very interesting. Others were very dull and had to be skipped. The description of the author’s relationship with his son is what kept me listening to the end, however. This is where something extremely unexpected was contained.
The book bounces between stories from his own past, personal philosophy, and an experience he and his had of riding a motorcycle from Chicago to the west coast. At the conclusion of the book Mr. Pirsig described the tragic murder of his son, Chris. He wondered where his son went after his death and cremation. He explains that he doesn’t so much miss Chris’s body – rather his spirit and the pattern of his living.
Some months later, his wife unexpectedly became pregnant. He and his wife carefully deliberated and then decided not to allow it to proceed. After all, he was over fifty years old and had enough child-raising opportunities. They made a medical appointment. Finally, they went over the decision one last time. During this discussion, he noticed a marked change in his wife. He described it as a dissociation as though his wife was starting to recede. Though he didn’t know exactly what it was, it was intense and he did not want it to continue. He described it as “a really frightening thing.” They did not go forward with the abortion and have since realized how horrible of a mistake it would have been been. He said it would have been a catastrophe.
Now they have a daughter named Nell. If she makes a fuss, creates a mess or gets upset, he and his wife are not bothered by it. They can always compare this to the silence of their son Chris.
“o o o l o 9 9 i k l ; i . , p y k n u l m m m m m m m m m m l l l”
This collection of letters, numbers, and punctuation are the first published words of their little girl Nell and were included by Mr. Pirsig at the very end of his book.
What a beautiful testimonial for life.
Re: Unemployment Compensation Isn’t “Good News”
13 December 2008
In a previous job I used to visit our nation’s capital frequently. Its denizens love the pointed phrase on their license plates: “Taxation Without Representation.” They apparently want a senator to call their own.
An article from the December 5th edition of the Yuma Sun web site brings up another even more egregious case of taxation without representation occurring right now. Our government is spending trillions of dollars that belong to our children and those who are yet unborn. Who is addressing their interests?
When President Bush proposed the first stimulus package several months ago I heard someone liken it to taking a big scoop of water from the deep end a pool and dumping it into the shallow end. However, on the way to the shallow end, a significant amount is spilled. What I mean, if the government gives out $100 billion, the payback will be some value higher than that due to inefficiencies and bureaucratic overhead costs.
The fact is that the money being doled out left and right must come from somewhere. It is called DEBT. We are borrowing from other countries who will probably be interested in getting their money back at some stage.
To quote Tibor Machan, the author of this interesting article, “it is useful to call to mind the fact that in a free and just society no one is another’s slave or involuntary servant, even in times of emergency.”
I welcome your comments.
Honda opens plant in Indiana day before Big 3 go begging
24 November 2008
From the CATO institute:
One day before the CEOs of General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler told the Senate Banking Committee that their industry faced imminent collapse without an emergency infusion of $25 billion, a new automobile assembly plant opened for business in Greensburg, Indiana. Although the hearing on Capitol Hill received far more media coverage, the unveiling of Honda’s latest facility in the American heartland speaks volumes about the future of the U.S. car industry—and shows why the proposed bailout of Detroit’s Big Three is so misguided.
What does this tell you? Is the auto industry in the America in decline? Honda apparently doesn’t think so. Though there are reams of evidence showing that this bailout is the wrong thing, I fear the Democratic congress – who has received huge infusions of cash from the UAW to their campaigns – will not be able to resist the urge to plop down a huge chunk of cash. Certainly the last thing the UAW wants is Chapter 11; their labor contract would probably be dissolved.
I, for one, am crossing my fingers that Congress with think more about the future of our country instead of the future of campaign contributions.
More Considerations on Prop 8
8 November 2008
Back in late May of this year, after the California Supreme Court had deemed unconstitutional the ban on gay marriage, the LA Times issued an editorial stating that public officials who are morally opposed to gay marriage should not be allowed to opt out of performing those marriage. After all they are paid to perform marriages. They state, “Gay and lesbian couples should not be subjected to embarrassing scenes in which county workers scurry around looking for someone willing to declare them married. ” On the other hand, do we not have any regard for the feelings of the officiators? Why can’t the tolerance road be traveled both ways? Why are the opponents of gay marriage the only ones required to be tolerant?
I think back to when I was stationed on the US submarine USS Michigan while it was being overhauled and refueled in the shipyard in Washington state. My watch rotation had me standing 24-hour duty every 3 or 4 days. Naturally some of those days would fall on Sunday. However, I made it clear that I would be happy to stand duty on Saturday instead so that I could spend Sunday with my family and attending to my church duties. In other words, I was seeking obey God’s commandment to honor the Sabbath day. Was I paid to stand duty on Sunday? Yes. Were there plenty of others that had no objection to swapping a Saturday for a Sunday? Yes. So the needs of the ship were being met, and I was allowed to observe my religious beliefs.
I wrote an article about this topic back in June which outlined some of the significant issues with same-sex marriage. It is ever more timely today than it was then.
Do the majority of Prop 8 supporters want Catholic Charities to be forced to close down their adoption services because they will not allow same-sex couples adopt from them? Is this tolerance of one’s religious views?
Do these supporters really want Methodist organizations in New Jersey to lose their tax-exempt status for not allowing a lesbian couple to use their facilities for a civil union ceremony? What control does this group have over their own destiny? Do we really want this?
Do we want Mennonites to be forced to teach their children about the gay lifestyle – even if that lifestyle is against their beliefs?
Do we want to legally require all doctors to perform artificial insemination on anyone who requests it? Is this the goal of all 47.5% of those who voted in favor of Prop 8?
To quote the article I referenced in my previous article:
“Perhaps you think people have a natural civil right to marry the person of their choosing. But can you really force yourself to believe that wedding photography is a civil right?
Maybe you believe that same-sex couples are entitled to have children, somehow. But is any doctor they might encounter required to inseminate them?”
Lastly, are we hearing about an outcry in Florida or Arizona where similar votes passed? I haven’t heard of anything. I suppose gays and lesbians in those states are as disappointed as those in California – and even in Utah.
jonsthoughts.wordpress.com 
