.

Paul Ryan the Incredible

Why tout a Russian atheist abortionist?

Paul Ryan has his interns and staff read Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged. Paul Ryan has said the author of these books is what inspired him to enter politics.  Paul Ryan has said many times that he is guided by this author’s principles and philosophy.  

Paul Ryan is talking about Ayn Rand.

Ayn Rand was born in Communist Russia.  She spoke English with a Russian accent. Ayn Rand was a loud prognostic Atheist. Ayn Rand was a leader in making abortion legal in this country.  

Can you imagine what the conservatives would do to Biden and the President if they touted a female Russian atheist abortionist? We liberals don’t care and would never accuse Paul Ryan of supporting communism, atheists or abortion.  

Paul now disavows Ayn Rand. Paul says when he found out, “some time ago”, he stopped being a follower. Paul was a key note speaker at the Ayn Rand convention in 2009. Last year Paul was still telling reporters he recommends reading Ayn Rand. 

So for 22 years Paul had not a clue as to who Ayn Rand was? Paul Ryan is either incredibly stupid or a great liar. If I were Paul I would fane stupid, that you can be excused.  

The problem, we the educated have, with Ayn Rand is not Ayn Rand per say but people who take her fictional writings as gospel. Ayn Rand believed the leaders have to be the Elite who rule through Economics. There would be no government as we know it.  It’s fun reading about a species that does not exist. But, has no substance for Homo sapiens.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

MZ August 25, 2012 at 12:08 AM
Elyse, Perhaps I could have explained my point a little better. You need to bring value to be valuable. I will agree that most businesses cannot function without people, but you should acknowledge that not all jobs require special skills. Take McDonalds for instance, a huge corporation. Without the cashiers, cooks, etc... McDonalds would not be profitable, and they are hugely profitable. Why do the workers only make minimum wage? It is due to supply and demand. There are literally millions of people who could perform the same work scope. Why would McDonalds pay them more than they are worth? The executives at McDonalds pay many people big time money, but they bring special skills that are hard to find and harder to replace. There are thousands of people who work for the corporate structure that make well into 6 figures due to their special skills. Certainly the CEO doesn't know every fry cook, but even if he did what do you expect to trickle down? I'll ask the same "loaded" question, what is the fry cooks fair share of the pie?
Elyse August 27, 2012 at 02:51 AM
MZ: I see what you are saying. I think it would require thinking outside the lines a little bit. People don't have to make the same, but livable wages for companies that can afford to do so is not asking too much. If you followed that link, it's not about the wages it's about ownership. So in the case of McDonalds, say the fry cooks had a percentage of the company.. They keep their wages but based on the performance of the company they could have extra. There isn't one concrete idea nor can I do it any justice in this casual conversation. There are several different approaches: many of which (as Phyllis has pointed out) have failed. Then there is social democracy (like we see in Europe). Granted, the socialist party has lost voters over the past few years.. Still there tho. When you talk about "supply and demand"- This is the effectiveness and the pitfall to capitalism because it doesn't account for things that humans value outside of money. In this society money governs the entire rationality. Look at how many people have gone through college to get new skills and they're walking out into an economy where despite their specialized skills there aren't the jobs available. Now too many people have skills and there aren't enough jobs to sustain them. Lots of supply, pay is low, and people are living in states of perpetual debt with limited resources. Low wages = less spending. Economics 101: Can't have a consumer based economy when consumers can't afford to consume.
MZ August 27, 2012 at 11:20 AM
Elyse, I knew many people that got "specialized" skills in college that never found a job in their field and were saddled with debt. If your skills don't add value, the specialization becomes irrelevant. You could be the best 8-track repairman on the planet, but not many people have 8-tracks anymore. Further, a degree in women’s studies isn’t that valuable to most people. You need to bring something to the table. Why would the fry cooks have a percentage of the company? Again, there are literally millions of people that perform that work. You cite Europe as an example of a socialist democracy while Europe is quite literally a powder keg. There is higher unemployment, worse conditions for graduating students, less potential to move upward, and the gap between rich and poor is larger in Europe. The European growth rate is miniscule with few exceptions and those exceptions are the least socialist. It sounds like you are for spreading the wealth around or “trickle up poverty”. The more we model ourselves after Europe, the more we will become Europe. It is not the paradise you might think it is.
Elyse August 27, 2012 at 12:40 PM
We're loosing base here MZ. I'm not advocating one way or another or claiming it's some sort of paradise. Just expressing flaws with our systems and theirs. I don't think education should be building careers, but helping people develop critical minds (a necessity for democracy). As with anything, I think we can learn from those around us (from the smallest level to the largest) to improve our situation on a societal level. I too, know several people who graduated with certain degrees and are now working a job that has really nothing to do with their degree. I know people who opted to go back for their masters to give themselves more of an edge. I know programmers that have been in business for 20+ years whose departments are being outsourced to India (and many companies are learning that the work isn't necessarily better because its cheaper... so we may see more of a shift back here for our tech skills). In sum, we live in a global society now. A choice of one country may directly or indirectly affect another. When we talk about unemployment, let's see how that has changed in the US after 2008. Unemployment rates skyrocketed and then people could not find jobs. These weren't lazy people, these were people who worked their entire lives. So now people are allowed to be on unemployment for 99 weeks, enough time to develop new skills or invest in a new line of business- or is it? In 2009 we shared the same employment rate as the EU. Now, EU as a whole has a higher rate...
Elyse August 27, 2012 at 01:12 PM
The EU includes 27 countries.. Germany has an unemployment rate of 5.6%.. They have a lower unemployment rate than the US. Spain and Greece have shockingly high numbers- Especially for their youth. Youth have the highest unemployment rates, this is a global trend. But this also explains why Europe as a whole has such a high rate, it's an average based on 27 countries. One way to combat this is to have young people develop skills that are in-demand (as you said). I also see this as semi-problematic because then as a country we're breeding people for production. In essence we're not teaching people to think critically, we're teaching them to perform better for means of capital pursuit. Tell me how the USA is in "economic crisis" and CEO's pay have risen upwards of 27% over the past year. Not the case with small-medium size business. Local companies have struggled (as a general whole). Between 1978 and 2011 CEO pay has grown 725% while worker pay fell 2% (http://www.epi.org/publication/ib331-ceo-pay-top-1-percent/). Who am I to say what's fair... But those numbers don't add up and it seems to have a trickling effect on the economy. Money still isn't going to job creation and these companies have no obligation to America. There was a time where they did. An employer took pride putting people to work and ensuring they could live. Not the case anymore: globalization. Do we accept the situation and start selling labor for the same cost as China, Philippines, etc?

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »