This is the one of the best protests I have seen in a long time. It looks like a lot of internet radio stations and services are banding together to stand up to big government. Here is what I found when I went to Pandora.com today:
“I’m sorry to say that today Pandora, along with most Internet radio sites, is going off the air in observance of a Day of Silence. We are doing this to bring to your attention a disastrous turn of events that threatens the existence of Pandora and all of internet radio. We need your help.†- You can found out more information at SaveNetRadio.org.
Good job to all the participating internet radio services. There is no better way to get the word out about this issue. Everyone that uses these services will be affected by this and will then know about the issue.
To save internet radio all you have to do is go to SaveNetRadio.com and get the contact information for your Congressmen; then let him know you’re not happy. Trust me, they care about what you think, that’s their job.
On the talkcast recorded June 24th, 2007, Brandon and I talk about the first essay in “The Virtue of Selfishness†called “The Objectivist Ethicsâ€. The essay talks about the core values and virtues of Objectivism. It closes with a very short description of how they apply to a political system, but mainly focus on man as an individual.
Ayn Rand starts off by defining ethics and morality. Basically, she says it’s a code of values that someone uses to determine what is good and what is evil. The simplest standard of value is an organism’s life.
“An organism’s life is its standard of value: that which furthers its life is the good, that which threatens it is the evil.†- The Virtue of Selfishness, Ayn Rand p.17
On page twenty-five, she applies this idea to rational man. She clarifies that we differ from animals by our ability to further our understanding of good and evil with reason. It is not just what will threaten our lives that is evil, evil is also that which threatens our (rational) values. Values should not be based off of whims; they should be based off of man’s ability to understand, rationally, what is in his or her self-interest.
This is only a taste of what is in the essay. There is so much information covered, it would take me more then a few minutes to talk about it here. Brandon and I discussed the whole thing on the show recorded on TalkShoe.com. After listening, if you think there is a point we missed, feel free to leave a comment and we will discuss it.
The essay we are going to discuss next week (July 1st) is the title essay in “Philosophy: Who Needs It?â€. It is only $7.99 at most book stores, so there is no excuse not to read it.
It seems that every time someone finds out that I am studying Objectivism they ask me what I think about the “Warâ€. This is a very hard question to answer because I don’t really know what they are asking. If they were asking what I think about the War at its current state, I would say it’s a failure. If they were asking if I felt it was necessary, I would say yes, but not the way Bush executed it. I believe we are fighting a war with the wrong people.
I would make these statements just by using my own reasoning. So, when they would ask me questions or try to debate me on the issue, I would have to decline since I don’t know the whole issue. I just know my own opinion, but lack the evidence to back my arguments. So, of course, I started looking for some evidence.
After looking around the ARI website, I found this article that was published in “The Objective Standardâ€. The article is called The “Forward Strategy†for Failure. It starts off at the beginning of the war then finishes up with its current state. It’s very well-written and seems well-researched, but again, I am not an expert on this subject so I could be wrong. It’s a long read but well worth it.
What I hope everyone will take away from this article is a new understanding of what we’re dealing with. Even if you don’t agree with everything that is said, I hope you will at least agree that the war is important and that we need a good leader to finish the job that Bush started botched. Read the article and let me know your thoughts.
On Business Week’s website they have a section called the Debate Room. It’s a place where they bring up a hot topic and find two experts to write essays, one for each side of the issue. The topic this month was Universal Health Care, and they featured Onkar Ghate of ARI.
“Universal Health Care: No Sick Joke
Small businesses—and large—have trouble attracting the best job candidates because of the high price of health care. Entrepreneurship demands nationalized medical insurance. Pro or con?†- businessweek.com
The two essays are very interesting, but it’s even more interesting to read the comments and see who supports each side. It seems that people are split on the issue, but more doctors agree with Onkar. They feel that the government is creating an unfair market. One even gave the example of cosmetic surgery where the prices are cheaper because of the lack of government regulations. This allows for the free market and competition to keep the pricing and quality in check.
With the current state of health care I don’t believe there is a quick fix. Also, socializing health care is not the answer. Just look at how bad the government handles education, Medicare, social security, and welfare. Do you want the government to handle your heath care, too? Looking at their track record with other social programs, I don’t think it would be a good idea. The only thing that could help the current situation is limiting government interference, not creating more.
On the talkcast recorded June 10th, I talked about a story called, “Corporate America and the Intern Cultureâ€. I didn’t give it justice on the show so I figured I would post about it here so I can get more opinions on the issue. Here is part of the article:
“In an Afterword Frederick writes, “Some students are now, indeed, paying thousands of dollars for summer internships, and some middle-aged career changers are competing in ever-greater numbers for the opportunity to answer phones and open the mail for free. Corporate America, of course, couldn’t be more thrilled that the great intern scam thunders on unhindered, while the underlying ethics and legality of the whole institution go completely unquestioned.†Why has the corporate system become so unbalanced that workers are paying to work? Why are we being told by colleges and corporations that it is necessary? Why aren’t we refusing such deception?†–echoflip
Go read the article and then read the comments that followed. There is a lot of good dialog, and don’t miss the one from the commenter Kurt. He posted a well-thought out comment that supported the views I was trying to express on the show.
“I would also argue that many companies who offer non-paid internships are still LOSING money by providing this service. While you see not paying an intern as “free labor†you have failed to recognize that it takes a great deal of resources away from the company to provide the necessary training to teach an intern necessary skills.†– Kurt from echoflip
Also, I would like to thank everyone that called in and text chatted during the show. It makes the show better when there is active participation. If you would like to be a part of the show, just go to TalkShoe.com and sign up for an account. If you have any questions, just send me an email.
I am a little late to post this but one of my local new papers, The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, published one of ARI’s op-eds. It was about Rachel Carson, the mother of environmentalism, who attended what is now Chatham University (located in Pittsburgh).
“On May 27, environmentalists will celebrate what would have been the 100th birthday of Rachel Carson, the founding mother of their movement.†– Read the full article here.
The editorial is called Rachel Carson’s Genocide and focuses on DDT and malaria in Africa. It also talks about how Carson used misinformation to get her movement started. If you do a search on Google you will find better articles on the information she used and how she manipulated it. It reminds me of how people are now doing the same thing on the global-warming issue (on both sides).
I am always embarrassed when Pittsburgh honors this woman; we even have a bridge named after her. How could the city be so proud of someone who is responsible for the death of millions of people?
Her movement is strong and can not be persuaded with reason, so I just hope we can keep them in check. Read the op-ed and let me know what you think about it.
I know this is old news but I just found this article on the Capitalism Magazine website. It’s about the minimum wage issue and how the Speaker of the House was a hypocrite on her standing. I guess there is a US Territory that was left off the bill.
“American Samoa would have been the only U.S. territory not subject to the federal minimum wage.†- CM
The article points out that there are two US companies that have packing plants there and that they would suffer if the wages were increased. But here is the kicker: the two companies mentioned are from California where Speaker Pelosi has ties.
“It’s not unreasonable to guess that Speaker Pelosi’s position has to do with the interests of her well-heeled constituents.†- CM
It’s just funny how these people can say they’re for the common good of the people and then you find out they are really for the “good” of themselves. I wouldn’t have a problem with it if they were up front about it. I just don’t like, or trust, people that are two faced.
The last few lines of the article say it all, so make sure you go read it. Lastly, I do not support the minimum wage; I feel that it demoralizes the hard working people that earn what they make. Why should some new unskilled worker get paid the same as someone that is skilled? Also, an employer will only pay you as much as you are worth to them, no more and no less. So it is not fair for the government to set a worker’s worth; not all workers produce equally. Some produce more and are worth more, whereas some produce less and are worth less. The government needs to stay out of business.
