Yeah, I meant to argue the Indian Mother thing. Really? Who is hurt or damaged in any way by this transaction?

Rand called capitalism the "Unknown Ideal." The United States came very close to this ideal and when it did, the nation blossomed into the greatest country in the history of the world. It had the greatest productivity, the greatest freedom, and was a magnet to the oppressed all over the world. As socialism crept in, little by little it became eroded by Wilson, by FDR, and by Obama. Now that the balance has tipped and the U.S. has moved into a fascist economy, not only will its people suffer, but the rest of mankind. Because when America was at its apex, the western world followed its example, but now, America is following Europe's example. Too bad. I loved my country.

Ayn Rand is EXTREMELY IMPORTANT to all of the no nothings out there who choose to attack her. Her view of the world of economics IS the most rational, reasonable and logical way of functioning in the economic world. ALL of the other ways of functioning in the economic world are perpetually failing and you thought nothing was perpetual. What the governments of the world have done is to destroy the minds of the youth for years now so we are in a steady decline following the rest of the world that has declined under us. The best thing the the governments of the world can do is just LEAVE US ALONE. Ayn Rand was correct.

I wonder only why anyone would bother with salon.com.

I'm in the woods on vacation - only access is a personal mobile hotspot...great technology but ouch on the cost.

More when I return this weekend. But it seems to me there is a marked increase in anti-Rand rants over the recent past. I see that as excellent news...they are aware of her ever-growing influence (and the ever-diminishing influence of the Left), and like cornered rats they have no choice but to lash out. I haven't read the article yet..but if it isn't a rehash of every criticism I've read over the past 40+ years, I'd be surprised...

The article has all the trimmings of socialist propoganda. Specifically, extremely shallow; never getting into the details and never considering the costs of the alternatives, both moral and financial. Like the Indian surrogate mother for $8,000 - and the alternative? Just give her the money? Is the author volunteering or is he "volunteering" others to give? Or, perhaps, she should starve? But, that would require "thought," something that immature socialists are physically incapable of. Feelings, nothing more than feelings...

Yes and the only way to stop them is by driving the government of the United States out of America.

Many can simply dismiss this diatribe as completely irrational. But worse than this article is that all the Statists in this country would blindly agree with the author and again vote for a Pres. who will continue the destruction of any remaining elements of Capitalism in this country.

This paragraph is obviously written by someone who has been schooled in Marxist thinking, where the distribution of wealth means if somebody is getting more, somebody else is getting less. And when the term "community as a whole" is used, you know that a demand for wealth redistribution from those who have earned to those who haven't will soon follow.

Actually economics and trade systems yield quite readily to a mathematical analysis process that is similar to that used to identify the properties of the power distribution grid. The primary parameters are; generation, transport, and load. There are two widely disparate schools of thought as to how to apply this to economics and they fall roughly into the Keynes and Hayek camps. The fundamental difference between these two philosophies is the identification of the primary driver of the system. In the Keynesian model the load must accommodate the capacity of the generator and in the Hayekian model the generator must respond to varying demands by the load.
The similarities between the power grid model and the global economic model are clear and raises the question, should production be driven by demand or should demand be driven by production? The parallels with a central planning versus a true free market system are obvious.

Opinions are like rectal orifices.
Everybody has one........
Soros, the man who destroyed the Pound Sterling, who worked with the Nazis against his fellow Jews, is not to be trusted.

I got as far in the article as "an advisor to President Obama" before stopping. You know it's a left-wing propaganda piece when you start seeing that. I'm not going to waste my time.

This is a child's argument, taking an extreme position and showing its flaws.

The problem with his examples is that the costs are not all captured in the prices. Milton Friedman understood this, and coined the term "involuntary servitude or conscription" or "involuntary costs". These are costs to people who did not agree to them. Air/Water/Noise Pollution is one example. Another would the the taking of an endangered species.

Personally, I see nothing wrong with paying a woman to have a tattoo on her forehead for $10K. That is just an agreement which both parties agree. The reverse example for socialists is free plastic surgery for the rich.

I think we should write a rebuttal called "Lazy Fare".

I am always amazed when MORONS write articles.

The constant references to banks and "deregulation."

Have they forgotten Dodd Frank and the Government bail out of banks and all the Government help to banks. That is in no way Laissez-Faire.

Laissez-Faire would mean that there would have been NO bailout, the Banks would be bankrupt and the system would have reset itself properly.

Great minds think alike:-)

Didn't you read the writers' job requirements? "Know just enough about rand to be able to trash her on a moment's notice, and write 1 article monthly taking something she says out of context and vilifying her for it".

ha! I was just writing a post quoting the same paragraph, but I stopped earlier.
There is no such thing as the well-being of the community as a whole. If that is your aim, you are lost before you being. case closed.

Haha, All-true-ism is true because "tru" is in it. Science, yes, science will tell us what to do. Then we won't have to think at all. We can create a massive robot that spouts Marx when we try to gratify any desire but basic biological urges.

There is no 'science or empirical research' rigorous or otherwise in economics. That entire concept along with 'social science' are fallacies and oxymorons.

The American Dream the author speaks of is that of FDR and the 'rights to have' rather than the 'rights to do', and I don't think AR even wounded it. It's alive and well today.

Normally I consider persistence to be a virtue. But when I read a paragraph such as "It therefore is not free trade in itself that must be called into question, but the fact that all freedom can only be implemented in a manner that is responsible toward those around you. These responsibilities are governed by moral values and by an ethical code that is respectful of the well-being of the community as a whole, starting with the obligation not to harm others when pursuing self-interest. By virtue of the fact that the unscrupulous and profit-hungry miss no opportunity to take advantage of unconditional freedom for their own profit and to the detriment of others, it is essential to establish regulations, which are nothing more than protective measures for society. This is, however, not what has happened,..." and realize that I'm re-hearing From each according to his abilities, To each according to his needs for the millionth time, I wonder if it is a virtue.

there were some excellent comments. I recommend going in there and giving some votes. I love it when for example they call her racist and then someone excerpts from her essay on racism. I Salon, dedicated to posting anti-Rand rants three times or more a week. It's like it's their mission. it's awesome!

What 'free market economy'? It has been constantly manipulated to be less and less "free market" since 1913.
In the wildest stretch of the imagination there is nothing about this economy that resembles a "free market."

Good comment and post. I just don't ever see it changing. Objectivists and objectivism are such good scapegoats!