Please see my post under lostinaforest's question below:

No capitalism would be nice. The only way that it will ever work is if one is an objectivist. It is irrational to think that everyone will become an objectivist. Jesus had a 2000 year head start over Ayn Rand, and not every one is a Christian.

Are we going to regulate thinking so people act more capitialistically? No. There is not one person on earth that can think, produce or create at his highest potential at the point of a gun. What kind of system would we need then to prevent this?

Its not "the only fair system" is a false-dichotomy bifurcation. I will give you that it appears to me a more fair system than others.
Yes, you did. this entire premise rests on an assertion that money is the only means of trade and trade is the metaphysical nature of man.
What is man trading for?
Reduction of labor. How else might man reduce his labor?

You are also making an assertion that Slavery is the only alternative to capitalism. There are other alternatives. I'm going to let this thread build up before we start exploring those.

Please see below under lostinaforest's question.

No. I mean specifically establishing a politico-economic means of trade by an arbitrary standard such as gold in its purest form.

I believe capitalism is NOT objective.

The Premise:

Capitalism is NOT the only system geared to the life of a rational being.

Ayn Rand makes the assertion -not a reasoned metaphysical argument or epistemological argument- that she shores up with deductive reasoning, NOT inductive reasoning. I.e. there is no metaphysical concrete regarding capitalism to induct it as an axiom. She asserts her position with multi angular, seemingly well-reasoned arguments. And she was right considering her analysis of human history and development in that time.

She asserts:

“[Capitalism is] the only system geared to the life of a rational being.”

{…A Completely respectable position considering her arguments commensurate with that time.}

However, human beings are tied to time and as cognition develops consciousness changes over time, absorbing wider and wider premises, and thus technology increases. As technology increases man’s labor is reduced freeing him to pursue his creative endeavors.

What is Labor in its most basic terms? The expression and use of human energy.

What exactly was it that the members of Galt’s Gulch were doing with their energy? Creating and laboring.

What did man do when he used his energy to pick up a heavy stick or mammoth femur and use it for a weapon? He performed a creative metaphysical integration to reality, then an act of labor to kill his prey, attack his neighbor, or defend his territory.

Consider that humans did not have currency per se, until about 2500 years ago. Man was clearing forests and applying agricultural techniques 50,000 years ago! So how did man manage to survive and thrive for 47,500 some odd, years without money if it is indeed “[T]he only system geared to life of a rational being?”

{If you can clear a forest to grow a crop you just might be a rational being!}

Oh, and his brain wasn’t that different than ours…

Money is merely a socially accepted, construct created as a convenient means to trade.

Money is not a metaphysical concrete any more than society is. The terms can be rationally changed by philosophical choices and considerations.

The money standard requires a scarcity mentality rather than abundance one.

The only reason anything has value is either because it is thought to be scarce and thus egoically satisfying to acquire it, or it relieves the burden of labor.

Creativity reduces scarcity. I.e. Fuel economy is increased by microprocessors, that were developed by a creative mind (I presume because they enjoyed it), that have expanded the oil supply.

Creativity expands materials science and use: I.e. we can make gold, although it is radioactive at this time. There is no reason that we can not make all the gold we need –or any other material for that matter; We’ve had synthetic diamonds since 1953!


Is it possible that we have reached a point where trading is no longer the natural state of man but rather advanced education to expand his creativity and thus his ability to use technology to free him from burdensome labor once and for all?

Terms:

Let’s stick to the premises, carefully examine our emotions, and avoid logical fallacies –especially insults.

If I commit a logical fallacy, I promise to be gracious, examine it or accept, correct or retract it. I expect the same level of maturity from you! Please review logical fallacies online. I am referencing wiki as I have not yet memorized them all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fal...

I will extend a morally blank check for 2 emotional digressions per person, once exceeded I will not respond further to the post until it is corrected.

I will also use the Ayn Rand Lexicon online as a reference to clarify her position so we all don’t go reasserting her premises in our own terms.

http://aynrandlexicon.com/

This is a work in progress…