Atlas Shrugged DVD recalled due to ideological errors

Interesting Note: Rational self-interest is subservient to the NAP.

Wikipedia:

13 14 15

You seem to be implying that all laws are legitimate and that one corporation wouldn't lobby to the detriment of another. I'm saying that unfair laws shouldn't be passed, not that companies should be free to ignore the law. Regulation doesn't come from and angel bringing down tablets from god, it comes from congress. Congress writes laws about corporate structure but no one in congress knows how steel is forged, so they hire experts. The experts work in the steel industry (because that's where they can make the most money when congress isn't writing legislation about steel forging), and thus incentives are screwy. They don't want to say that their company is bad (no one likes to say that an org they feel they choose to belong to is bad) so they set their company up as the ideal. People who make more are unsafe, people who make less are inefficient, people who use different blends are making an inferior product. This can all happen without any sort of corruption, but corruption happens too.

There's a curve (called an indifference curve in econ) in three dimensions. Being on this curve means that to be better, faster, or cheaper requires trading off the others. It's possible to be behind the curve and thus able to strictly do better (to do better without any tradeoffs in being better, faster, cheaper). Trivial silly example, say all factory workers need to stand on one leg at all times (this is just trying to claim that such a state is logically possible). It's trivially obvious that there are things (like affirmative action hiring) that moves a company off of this curve. You can argue that some are worthwhile in service to other goals (like affirmative action hiring), but others aren't.

I'm implying that all I ever get from Randian phlosophy is the exact opposite. That all regulations that are bad just happen to hit Rand's dream companies.

You mean a novel (and young people on internet forums) might simplify a complex issue to focus on one aspect they consider the most important (in this case, having people who make things be able to actually make them)? She shows two states of the world, one where people can only operate businesses in the exact way the government says, down to how many tons of steel they can pour from a refinery (this is after a time where no more refineries can be built) and price fixing and a society where people can do whatever they want, everyone is a small business owner or the one employee of a small business. She says one works, the other doesn't. That it's possible to go disastrously far in one direction, but not the other.

The problem is that unregulated markets tend to run on a fuel called “greed,” which “pollutes” out a chaotic notions of a heavy focus on profit at expense of well being, many parts of society being set under the rule of single companies (note Murdoch’s empire) and the poor find lack of way to rise above the dark clouds of poverty. The economy of the true democracy would be one which allowed enterprise while the government regulates to ensure the companies do not abuse the economic power.

Plan economies are inefficient but so it the Capitalist model of economic anarchy. Ayn Rand’s path is one beyond this: into a selfish system that encourages one to think only of themselves, leading to increase poverty and (ironically in relation to Rand’s quotes) monopolies. In the end... there will be chaos. Money is not evil, nor is it good. Rand’s objectivism is a way of extreme greed, a way of unmeasured destruction. Just observe the reason for the Altus Struggle DV Ds being recalled: objectivism discourages the way of charity and disgraces self sacrifice for the collective that be humanity. Seek out the path of balance for the united collective of persons, not a herd or Rand’s play land of selfish criminal notions.

OK, this is getting a little silly.

I'm sure a thread can be started on the natures of Capitalism.

Randianism (and Rand herself) is polarizing enough that a discussion of it in any thread even remotely mentioning it shouldn't be all that surprising, any more than any thread that mentions a situation with a religion (see the closed pedo hunter thread) will ultimately devolve to "religion sux".

And those are the sorts of threads that get locked, hence why I felt it best to relocate the discussion.

I think it's because people have pre-written barnum statements that get used as the reviews they put on DVD reviews to make them sell more. Sometimes this ends up with an Epic Fail like what happened here were it's a case of what movie were you watching for the writer. Note:Review writers probably don't actually watch the movies they review, hence leading to the error.