Do Trump's Assets Outweigh His Liabilities? A Debate with Professor Richard Salsman

Подписаться 833

50% 1

The Rational Egoist: Do Trump's Assets Outweigh His Liabilities? A Debate with Professor Richard Salsman
In this episode of The Rational Egoist, host Michael Liebowitz debates Professor Richard Salsman, an economist at Duke University and Senior Scholar at The Atlas Society, on the controversial question: Do Donald Trump's assets outweigh his liabilities? Together, they analyze Trump's political, economic, and personal legacy, discussing the impact of his policies, leadership style, and public persona. With sharp insights from both sides, this debate offers a comprehensive examination of Trump's influence on the U.S. and global stage. Tune in for a lively and intellectually engaging discussion that digs into the complex nature of Trump's successes and failures.
Michael Leibowitz, host of The Rational Egoist podcast, is a philosopher and political activist who draws inspiration from Ayn Rand’s philosophy, advocating for reason, rational self-interest, and individualism. His journey from a 25-year prison sentence to a prominent voice in the libertarian and Objectivist communities highlights the transformative impact of embracing these principles. Leibowitz actively participates in political debates and produces content aimed at promoting individual rights and freedoms. He is the co-author of “Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Correction Encourages Crime” and “View from a Cage: From Convict to Crusader for Liberty,” which explore societal issues and his personal evolution through Rand’s teachings.
Explore his work and journey further through his books:
“Down the Rabbit Hole”: www.amazon.com...
“View from a Cage”: books2read.com...
join our Ayn Rand Adelaide Meetups here for some seriously social discussions on Freedom www.meetup.com...

Опубликовано:

8 окт 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 16

@radiozelaza 2 дня назад

Zelensky is a hero. Something Salsman would never be

@mgoodkin 2 дня назад

Not much was mentioned about Trump's foreign policy, given that it is an essential feature of strengthening our national security. I favor his hardline stance on China, Iran, and North Korea, which I would consider great threats to this country, along with our allies. I also like his Middle East policy, and support for Israel. I believe it when he says that if had been in office, there would be no ongoing conflict there. Also, he said he could end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours. That would be nice. He doesn't oppose Zelensky, only the ongoing and seemingly endless and draining war in Ukraine. Getting back to his policy on China, I have mixed feelings about his policy on tariffs, but in the case of China, support it as a means of ending China's grossly unfair practices when it comes to intellectual property theft and the general treatment of US and foreign businesses there. I would consider that a violation of our national security. Unfortunately, many Objectivists place economic freedom above national security, without ever considering context, unless the foreign country like China is about to overtly threaten us, when it is too late. It shows there lack of ability to apply principles to complex political issues. I don't agree with all of Trump's policies. I think Michael raises some good points. Howevver, I sense that Trump's general orientation is toward greater freedom, despite instance where his decisions seem to go against it. It's much too easy to cherry-pick his so-called faults without equally weighing his assets, which I think many Objectivists tend to do. Instead of viewing the big picture, they zoom in on detail.

@rationalcapitalist 2 дня назад

Salsman is a joke and a good example of why the Atlas Society sucks.

@DeeperWithDiego 2 дня назад

What is going on? Michael's point about bankruptcy is to show how bad of a businessman Trump is. Good businessman make money they don't go bankrupt. They don't have to rely on a legal system because they couldn't sell widgets and spinners. This is like the 4th or 5th straw man I've heard so far.

@DeeperWithDiego 2 дня назад

The point in the conversation about the op-ed concerning whether Trump is a politician or businessman lost me. All completely irrelevant when concerning an individual protecting individual rights in a proper government. I would vote for a literal bum off the street if his platform was to shrink government and then do nothing. An individual who is neither a politician or a businessman. I know I could just Google his name but I'm on my phone voice to text. What's that president over a hundred years ago that went in and did literally nothing while he was in office? That president is my hero. I would vote for people whose platform is to sit on their hands and do literally nothing while in office.

@michaelliebowitz7439 2 дня назад

Calvin Coolidge. Barney’s point in the op Ed was that an asset of Trump is not being a politician. That’s why I pointed out that the claim is false.

@JackSutterEtc 2 дня назад

All founders believed in borders. Know how I know? They all believed in individual freedom (i.e. sovereignty), and national sovereignty as an extension of that individualism re: the nation in an international context. How can a nation maintain sovereignty if it doesn't have control over its borders or immigration standards and policies? It can't.

@JackSutterEtc 2 дня назад

Appreciate this debate, btw. I obviously agree with Salsman over you but not gonna hate, props for having the back and forth.

@JackSutterEtc 2 дня назад

One point re regulations: Trump imposed an EO assering that for every 1 regulation added, 2 had to be removed. He then exceeded his own standard and removed about 10 for every 1 that was added while he was president. So he deregulated FAR more than you give him credit for. Imo you minimize any and all positives about him and over-emphasize (i.e. distort and hyperbolize) the negatives to reinforce your bias. You are predisposed to dislike him, and tend to look for reasons to justify that position, and to minimize or sidestep anything that might give you cause to reassess. E.g. his bankruptcies. You say it like HE went bankrupt four times. He had never. He has had 4 businesses he put into bankruptcy, at least 2 or 3 of which were "bankrupt" as in pausing debt repayment, restructuring, and then resuming debt repayment, not "bankrupt" as in defunct; and that was 4 out of how many hundreds of businesses? If you compare the number of businesses he has had a controlling interest in or owned outright that have never gone bankrupt, to the number of bankrupt business, his success rate is above 90%. Food for thought.

@DeeperWithDiego 2 дня назад

I agree with you and salzman. There should be immigration policies and standards. I prefer no black people as a good standard to start with. No China men either. You know like in the past and what the federal government currently has. Racial quotas.