Do you want to live in the world of Atlas Shrugged? 

In my half a century lifetime after 911 liberty got taken away. Since then American society been advocating for diversity, equality and security. Today's pandemic and tomorrow's hope for peace and stability.

In today's world, the so called classical liberal view is carried by conservatives and libertarians, there is almost no difference between the two. Today's liberals are in the range communists and fascists: they don't want free speech, they don't want to see different opinions. They advocate violence against people they don't agree.

@@seanleith5312 Seriously? Those advocating violence and proping up murderes as heroes are from the right. The left advocates for freedom within a democracy. True individualism. Let people be and live their lives as they wish. When you bring harm to other living humans or want to bring harm to other living humans then authority steps in. But at this point, authority wants to control. The left wholeheartedly supports free speech. They understand that it comes with consequences. The right just wants to spout rhetoric and not suffer the consequences. Now there are extremists on both sides of the aisle and there really isn't a difference between the two. Now, Communism and fascism are two different sides of the coin. You can't be both. So you might want to learn the definitions before you label leftist as Communists and fascists. Because fascism today is coming from the right and from Trump supporters. And y'all like to label social democratic policy as communism when it's not. An equality comes into play in this country when we talk about equal opportunity. I know Americans like to believe that everyone has the same amount of opportunity to do whatever they want in this country, but they do not. Our history has proven this. And we need to own it and we need to change it. No one on the left is saying handout everything for free we're saying that support each other and give each other the same opportunity for Success. You're always going to have business owners and you're always going to have employees. They're always going to be different classes. But when a worker puts in the effort to help build a business they should get part of the profit sharing in a living wage. Period. We have given too much control to the oligarchs. And that started with Nixon and Reagan. We do need a centralized government and our government should play certain roles in our society. But as it stands today our government is giving all of the power to corporations. And then they're using propaganda to divide people on two sides. Rather than looking what makes a true democracy.

@@tammystewart10 America advocating for diversity and equality started well before 9/11. The false sense of security I will agree starting after 9/11. The idea of diversity and equality is truly Democratic and all about individualism that a Democratic Society is to support. Leave people alone to live their lives the way they want to live them unless they bring harm to other living humans. You don't get to bring your Bible into judging how someone should live or "morally" police them based on that premise. Not in a democracy that was founded upon freedom of religion. Freedom is far more than the Second Amendment. And Free Speech comes with consequences. You have a responsibility to not bring harm to others. And your actions if they bring harm to others, have consequences. And so do your words if they incite violence. That's something that a lot of First Amendment screamers don't seem to realize. Say what you want, believe what you want, but when those words and actions harm someone else, another living human being, you suffer the consequences. It's really that simple.

@@tamaragraham6859 What world are living in?

Remember what happened to the woman that got pregnant for the second time? I've read that Rand didn't address charity. She most certainly did in a fully realistic manner.

The problem is that only the people who are at the very TOP of their professions are allowed into Galt's Gulch. It's an elite, exclusive meritocracy. I am nowhere near the TOP of my profession, but I don't want to live on government welfare like a bum forever. I want to work and make my own way. But since I wasn't genetically blessed with genius DNA like all those "GODS" of Galt's Gulch, I would never be allowed in. So fuck 'em.

@@CheerfullyCynical829 Really? What about the mother who just wanted to raise her children to appreciate merit and virtue. Or even the brakeman who was a music student. I reject your premise and whining.

@J D I kinda hope it happens ha.

Agreed

TOTAL LIES

@@forrestdickson2189 LIAR

What do u mean?

Mike, did you read the book. Look at what is happening in countries.

Real supply and demand curves are nearly impossible to know. Knowing them would mean knowing what the preferences of any possible customer are, and what the reactions and actions of any possible producer would be. And both curves are constantly changing. The supply curve is a way of responding to the following question: If the price of this product was "X", what would be the amount of products that would be produced? Te demand curve is a way of responding to the following question: If the price of this product was "X", what would be the amount of products demanded by the consumers? The producer could hire an engineer in order to make the product cheaper to produce. That way, they would be able to give a better than the competitors' price thus selling more while maintaining the product's profit margin. All the producer must know about supply and demand curves in this case, is an estimation of the amount of extra demand their product will get when they make their price cut.

And I agree with RonHoward's opinion below.

RazzleDazzle114 monopolies result from government intervention. In a free market no monopolies would exist there will always be competitors.

@@fitofight8540 What a joke? It's government intervention that broke up Standard Oil and Microsoft. Else, we would still be under their heels. Ayn Rand forgot that. She was stupid. If you want to see what happens to a country under the unfettered rule of a corporation, Google East India Company and the horrific acts it committed.

@@kim-o-san Lol all the west and east india companies based in europe were government chartered. And standard oil and Microsoft might've had more competition if there wasn't a corrupt government for them to lobby to.

As a customer you always have the possibility of trying to get a better price from anyone else, so the shop keeper is not usually able to charge whatever they want to the customer. If a shop keeper is not able to give a good enough price for the customers, that shop keeper will not be able to sell enough products, and will be replaced by someone able to do that. In a free society anyone can become a shop keeper, and that way prices are created. What you say about inclinations can be true, but in high inflation countries you can verify that despite their inclination people do buy things that were "cheaper" previously. Anyway, when people buy things, they do it because at that moment they value the money they pay less that the thing they buy with the money. Buying is not different than barter in that way. The value of a product is something subjective, and it depends on the place and the moment. The price is something objective (but also dependent on the place and the moment). The price is the amount of some currency paid to buy a product. The value for the customer will be higher than the price they paid. And the value for the shop keeper will be lower than the money received for the product.

I'll tell you what's far worse, according to Objectivism: Placing your rationally aquired trust into an institution because you know for a fact that it's based on and operating under the moral code of altruisim.

jhen333 Because people don't have equal drives, ambitions, and abilities. If you mean equality of outcome, you'd necessarily to take away the liberty of those who would otherwise be high achievers in order to make sure people who couldn't or wouldn't otherwise match their achievements were "equal".

Because it is most unfair to treat people or things that are unequal as equal. You need equality of opportunities, not equality of outcome.

She also promoted to come back to gold and silver standard for the emission of currency, replacing our actual debt-based system of fractional reserve. That would seriously reduce the amount of debt to a minimum.

But in order to have "an environment where people could be more creative and live up to their potential," you first need financial security. Having a job helps you get there. You don't have to like your job; that's just life. Wouldn't equality and security be liberty from debt? Yes, but where does that debt come from? Financial mistakes? Unrealistic expectations?