Will we ever get a good Ayn Rand movie? I fucking loved Atlas Shrugged and Objectivism is god-tier ideology...

Will we ever get a good Ayn Rand movie? I fucking loved Atlas Shrugged and Objectivism is god-tier ideology, but the movie of Atlas Shrugged sucked.

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.4plebs.org/tv/search/text/Will we ever get a good Ayn Rand movie/
dailyhurricane.com/2010/07/the-perfect-free-market-somalia.html
nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Cost-of-living/Local-purchasing-power
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

t. american

...

>god-tier ideology
>fedora tipping is one of its unbreakable tennents

archive.4plebs.org/tv/search/text/Will we ever get a good Ayn Rand movie/

This is an 18+ site kiddo

THIS IS STALE PASTA

>i posted it again, mom!

Didn't Ayn Rand live out her final years on social security and Medicaid?

Didn't Mitch McConnell receive treatment for childhood polio affliction at a FDR founded government subsidized healthcare facility?

Didn't Jared Kushner make a a billion dollar real estate deal with George Soros?

Hasn't Trump reneged on countless campaign promises from providing his tax returns to locking her up to building a wall to not cutting Medicaid?

Why are all right wingers such dishonest hypocrites? An answer that isn't a deflection would be nice.

>I fucking loved Atlas Shrugged

but muh emails

Stop making this fucking thread OP

I know your some faggy leftist that gets triggered by free markets.

Nobody cares
Sage

>Didn't Ayn Rand live out her final years on social security and Medicaid?
This is the DUMBEST criticism of her.

She paid into the system her entire life. Is she not entitled to get some money back that the government stole from her

Lmao retard

Reminder Ayn Rand died a penniless slag living off of welfare because of her special brand of "Libertarianism"

she wasn't a libertarian and you have no actual criticisms against libertarianism

Just kill yourself you poverty loving turd
Lol you people actually ENJOY being poor

Anyone that doesn't support free markets deserves to be killed honestly.

I want to live in a country like Switzerland but far richer and with lower working hours

>all these objectivism hating commies
I knew Sup Forums was the most reddited board.

I support free markets and hate central banks but objectivism is fucking dumb

Why don't Libertarians just leave America if they're directly opposed to many of the values that have become synonymous with America since the Great Depression?

It's a serious question from a non-American, wouldn't they be happier?

>pay literal millions of dollars into the system
>kike lawyer takes out a few thousand a month after being told not to
>fedora tipping redditors spam shitty factoids for the next 3 decades

>Why don't Libertarians just leave America
Some of us already have moved to Switzerland.

We stay in America because we want to change the laws back to the way it was during the gilded age. When wages for the average worker increased dramatically while prices fell year after year.

Non-libertarians want economic stagnation and recessions we want economic progress.

I think it's wrong to criticize a work on the faults of the author, I mean after all, no one is perfect.

But in the case of Ayn Rand, understanding the author is essential to understanding the work itself. Ayn was addicted to amphetamine during the larger part of her active career, and it shows. Her books, mainly Atlas Shrugged, is best described as political smut fiction and is nothing more than an unhinged rant on a half baked philosophy that only works in theory.

So blinded was Ayn by her hatred for communism that she didn't see that her own belief was just as perfect in design but impossible in reality.

Maybe the movie sucked because the writing of the book also fucking sucks kek

Ayn Rand is an absolute joke. No respected philosopher agrees with her.

Free markets clearly work and there's loads of empirical evidence they do.
Objectivism is fucking retarded though.

>respected philosopher
Most philosophers deserve to be burned alive though.

>book is all about the value of self-interest, entrepreneurship and meritocracy
>randians eager to bring it to the screen
>movie is cheap and poorly made piece of shit

Really gets the noggin running

>us
>we

oh boy libcuck soapboxing in an unrelated thread

why are liberals so obsessed with trump that they turn every thread into trump bashing

Why do retarded leftists love central banks so much?
It's like they WANT to be poor and enslaved.

>Objectivism is god-tier ideology
let me guess, you have no actual non-meme based knowledge of literally any other ideology?

Fuck off you newfaggot who's never seen this pasta before

Bioshock disappointed me with the Rand stuff

Rand Paul should be president

>Free markets clearly work and there's loads of empirical evidence they do

That some fucking retarded doublespeak right there. Of course it works, no one said it doesn't work. That's not the real question. The real question is if it's good.

If the free market doesn't serve everyone then it's not a benign force. If the free market allows the strong to be strong at the expense of the weak, then it's not good.

it's a joke, you knoblord

>objectivism proves that ayn rand is a shit author

>The real question is if it's good.
It is good. It's great.

Switzerland is the closest thing to free markets we have today and it's fucking awesome and people have high as fuck living standards.
They also have private healthcare and it's cheap unlike in America.

>muh weak
The primary group of people the free market helps is the weak.

Remember when he co-sponsored the bill that allows internet providers to sell your web browsing data to advertisers but then excused himself from voting on the bill so he wouldn't be held accountable by his supporters?

I don't care.
Hers just playing politics.

His political positions are like 90% good.
Unlike the rest of the senate who are 2% good

>I don't care.

You shouldn't be allowed to vote.

>The primary group of people the free market helps is the weak.
bwahahahahaha

good goy, keep on believing that

I shouldn't be allowed to vote because I want to vote for the absolute best choice(even if they aren't 100% perfect)

The only reason Switzerland works is because of its location in central europe, and because it's a tax haven.

>The primary group of people the free market helps is the weak.

umm nope, why would you even think that? How does that make any sense to you?

While there have been good movies made out of shit books, I don't think Atlas Shrugged lends itself to that.
Unless someone does what Verhoeven did with Starship Troopers and turns it on its head and shits all over it. That'd be fucking awesome.

>bwahahahahaha
Not an argument whatsoever
Lmao you're so fucking btfo by places like Switzerland who have one of the freest markets in the world.

If what you are saying is true, the weak would be killed off there. Guess the exact opposite happened.


Kill yourself poverty lover

Switzerland is more jewish than Israel.

>of its location in central europe,
Completely irrelevant. If they weren't a free market they would be another debt ridden shithole like Greece or Spain.

>and because it's a tax haven.
No fucking shit you idiot.
Why do you think it's a fucking tax haven?

>umm nope, why would you even think that? How does that make any sense to you?
In a free market the poorest in society have their wages raised as economic production increases. Those which are too handicapped to work have a much greater pool of charity because of the fact prices constantly come down and everyone's savings rate increases because there is no central banking.

so?
U jelly of their wealth?

Not him, but freer markets mean a larger number of firms competing for workers. Ergo, the "weak" have far more bargaining power than they do in the weird mixed model that America currently uses. Competition also causes prices to drop over time.

You shouldn't be allowed to vote because when you're confronted with evidence that the worldview you're clinging to is objectively broken and a lie, instead of re-evaluating yourself you dig your head into the sand deeper and plug your ears.

I have no problem saying that delusional people shouldn't be allowed to vote.

read The Wealth of Nations you utterly complete idiot.

>You shouldn't be allowed to vote because when you're confronted with evidence that the worldview you're clinging to is objectively broken and a lie, instead of re-evaluating yourself you dig your head into the sand deeper and plug your ears.
Lmao I just told you rand is the lesser of many evils
I don't agree with what he did, I agree with the vast majority of his other policies though.

>Competition also causes prices to drop over time.
Not him but yes this is true.

It's not true in countries with central banks though because they keep prices high while fucking over consumers

That's a really naive outlook at the free market, and not what ever happened at all.
Switzerland is rich because they rely mostly on finances. They don't produce shit and they don't have "workers". They live off of other countries' money. It's just a tiny nation of bankers. It's fucking stupid to compare them with much more complex countries as the US, Russia, China, or even Germany.

How do you know? Until I just told you you weren't aware of how full of shit he is.

That may be true, though I certainly wouldn't consider a central bank to be a component of a free market.

All the countries in the world with the highest standards of living got that way through free markets. I don't think I even mentioned Switzerland.

And now you know why the world is the way it is.

But every instance of an attempt to open the markets has just led to a massive concentration of wealth to the elite, with the poor working standards hitting the majority.

ie UK, USA, South America, Japan etc.

somewhat of an ancapistani here. really i just believe in rugged individualist philosophy and think ancapistan is a pipe dream at the end of the day. pragmatically the austrian school is based and nails it. rothbard is pretty cool but still insane.

objectivism is trash tier liberty. also i'm a litfag so i get tilted at the very idea of an ayn rand novel being turned into a film. ayn rand was smarter than your average woman but she was still a dumb cunt woman. don't sit there and tell me shes some great russian mind when those awfully written books are her legacy. i mean fuck me dude have you never read any russians? russian lit is actually full of amazing authors and thinkers. everything dostoyevsky said about women applies to ayn rand.

>location is irrelevant
it's not thou, it's very relevant

>switzerland is not a tax haven
switzerland has very low taxes

>free market allows the poor to have their wages raised as the production increases
that's the problem thou, the production doesn't increase endlessly. As soon as the market stagnates, and it will, there will be a competition of who can deliver the product or the service at the lowest price. And when you can't make the material or the construction process cheaper, you will have to "optimise" the staff. The companies that fail to lower their costs will shut down, leaving unemployed workers in its wake. The surplus in workers will lower the wages.

>Will we ever get a good Ayn Rand movie?
Apparently he group that made the Atlas Shrugged movie trilogy are attempting to make another go of it.

You seem really butthurt at the facts.

>Switzerland is rich because they rely mostly on finances.
That's one of their many industries, yes.

>They don't produce shit and they don't have "workers".
They export many things and have countless workers you fucking idiot and these workers have extremely high wages with high purchasing power.
>They live off of other countries' money. It's just a tiny nation of bankers. It's fucking stupid to compare them with much more complex countries as the US, Russia, China, or even Germany.
Lmao Switzerland is currently the 3rd most free market country on earth after hong Kong and Singapore and they've been this economically free for a long time.
The only reason they have a large banking industry is because they have such free markets.

They also have affordable PRIVATE healthcare you gigantic retard.

We were talking about Switzerland but again, most of those other countries usually rely on income other than industries, and have a very low population, which is most of the time also concentrated in a limited area. And they can live off free markets because there are other countries getting fucked by them.

That's not true at all. The 19th and a lot of the twentieth centuries saw countless millions of people lifted out of poverty. There's a reason why 98% of us aren't subsistence farmers anymore, and it's not because we were all forced off our farms. Power and wealth became overly concentrated when the governments of the world started becoming bloated throughout the latter half of the twentieth century.

also if you get into arguments about the free market on reddit or Sup Forums you are a fucking loser. if you are actually a person who believes in that side of liberty you are wasting your fucking time. go argue it to your friends and family when it comes up. at least in that context the person you are trying to convince could be convinced. you can guess whether they are worth trying to convince etc. if you are arguing it online you are probably arguing with some leftist drone who is also most likely already lost to post-modernist dogma. can hardly think of something that is a greater waste of one's time.

>finances
>industry
That tells me all I needed to know about you.

America didn't have a low population, yet it's the most resounding example of how free markets raise the standard of living to an insane extent. I don't remember it needing to fuck any other countries to get there either, considering it was pretty isolationist until the World Wars.

Are you saying power and wealth only became overly concentrated during the latter half of the twentieth century?

cos fuck me it literally takes one conversation with any brain that is capable of rational thought of some extent to plant the seed that more free markets/more free speech leads to a better life for the monkeys involved. ignoring the obvious examples in asia one simply needs to look at how incredible the standard of living is for poor people in the first world now and how that is directly related to competitive 'free'er markets.

His point is this system would not work with every country doing it. It wouldn't be sustainable having a world where every country wants to earn shitloads of money but produce money (obviously)

They don't produce real capital, only intangible wealth.
>There's a reason why 98% of us aren't subsistence farmers anymore
Yes, it's called the industrial revolution. And while a market economy is how things were run, that does not necessarily mean you can call it the cause/saviour. Civilisation lifted people out of poverty, and now the same system is pushing so many back into poverty/ lacking basic human rights.

In response to OP, pic related is a good documentary on the disastrous effects of neoliberalism

It would help if it was a good book, with high school English ideology.

>it's not thou, it's very relevant
So you're saying if they had low economic freedom they would be just as rich?
How delusional and retarded can you possibly be?
>switzerland has very low taxes
No shit. I just said they have more economic freedom than the rest of the world, of course they have low taxes.

>that's the problem thou, the production doesn't increase endlessly. As soon as the market stagnates, and it will, there will be a competition of who can deliver the product or the service at the lowest price. And when you can't make the material or the construction process cheaper, you will have to "optimise" the staff. The companies that fail to lower their costs will shut down, leaving unemployed workers in its wake. The surplus in workers will lower the wages.

This entire thing is hilariously wrong.
If it were true then Switzerland would have low wages. They have the highest fucking wages in the world.
You can work in a swiss warehouse for a few months and you can then vacation in usa for like a year. Really high purchasing power.

>neoliberalism
Only delusional leftists that need to be thrown from helicopters use this word.

There is nothing new or liberal about today's world, fuck off.

>financial services isn't an industry
Socialists, everyone.

what?

Neoliberalism has been the dominant economic ideology for the past like, 50 years. It's been forced onto ex-leftist countries countless times by the USA, only for it to have terrible effects on the working classes (but it's okay because at least they're not commie anymore and USA can influence their businesses)

Not him

This is semantics, but to me industry implies producing some kind of capital, whereas finance is the exploitation and manipulation of money and virtual material, without production of anything real. Like i mentioned earlier, it is a parasitic method of wealth production and isn't sustainable.

Why do you leftists pretend wealth concentration is the reason the economy is stagnating and workers are suffering?

Getting rid of this wealth concentration will not increase living standards for workers. The workers are already consuming like 99% of all consumer goods. It doesn't fucking matter how much money the super rich have. If you take all their money it will only dramatically increase inflation and workers would have the exact same living standards

The only countries that managed to industrialize at all without the use of capitalism did so much later (i.e. by piggybacking off the innovations made by capitalists), at the expense of millions of lives, and had massive shortages in basically everything except tools of war. Free markets are the fastest and most effective way for countries to develop.

No, of course not. But free markets made the problem better, not worse, by giving people the ability to freely improve their lots in life. Prior to this, you were either insanely wealthy/powerful or you spent your meager existence farming dirt. "The middle class" did not exist. Concentration of power and the massive wealth gap you see today didn't show up until the government started messing with the economy.

Why do countries with the freest markets have the highest living standards and wages for workers?

Hmm, really makes you think.

>All the countries in the world with the highest standards of living got that way through free markets

you've really no idea what you're talking about

swear to god, all these fucking libertarian are all just a bunch of self educated crackpots. They're like the freemen movement except with economics.

look up the word "tax haven" you fucking hick

take a look at these statistics, notice that the purchasing power index for switzerland is lower than many other nations. AND MOST OF THE NATIONS THAT HAVE A HIGHER INDEX ALSO HAS A MORE HEAVILY REGULATED ECONOMY

i'm done wasting my time on arguing with you. You've a very naive picture of how economics work, and arguing with you is basically just teaching you economics from the ground up.

Yeah Somalia is just great

...

somalia is the way it is because of a commie govt crashing and genociding as it did so, and since it has been stateless (loosely) it's standards of living have risen. somalia is probably better a place to live in than venezuela at the moment.

>somalia has free markets
HAHAHAHAHAHA
Why are leftists so fucking retarded?

>It doesn't fucking matter how much money the super rich have. If you take all their money it will only dramatically increase inflation and workers would have the exact same living standards
Not at all, as long as that money exists the inflation rate would be the same, and if it stopped existing then, if anything, currency would deflate.

Anyway, the your first point is demonstrably untrue, which is why more socialist countries like the UK (I say socialist) have more social security, healthcare etc. than the USA, for example. This enables and encourages more social mobility, making people ultimately more free.
I think i'd agree with you about that point, but I don't think that necessarily means the markets should be absolutely free. We have seen the free markets encourage innovation and remarkable production, I agree, but we have also seen it divide populations into a hopeless and immobile working class and a ridiculously wealth-inflated elite. So the "markets" have their limits. After a while they only serve themselves, ie, the most powerful that manipulate them.

I mean, I don't think anyone honestly believes that in the USA, a relatively economically free nation, every single person has a fair shot at being successful, compared to say, France or the UK.

>look up the word "tax haven" you fucking hick
A country with low taxes that people in other countries like to store their wealth.
Also "hick" LOL

>take a look at these statistics, notice that the purchasing power index for switzerland is lower than many other nations.
This is bullshit. Look up local purchasing power, the Swiss have the highest.

>AND MOST OF THE NATIONS THAT HAVE A HIGHER INDEX ALSO HAS A MORE HEAVILY REGULATED ECONOMY
These are literally some of the freest markets on earth.
Especially New Zealand.
Man you just can't win.

>i'm done wasting my time on arguing with you.
You're done getting btfo by logic and common sense.
You're a leftist, this much happen a lot with people like you.

literally the first result from a quick google
dailyhurricane.com/2010/07/the-perfect-free-market-somalia.html

>these statistics are bullshit

lmao

>as long as that money exists the inflation rate would be the same,
HAHAHAHAHA
DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT INFLATION IS?

The working class consumes like 99% of all consumer goods. You're actually telling me taking all of the super rich people's money and letting the poor spend it would a) allow them to consume countless times more consumer goods and b) that prices wouldn't dramatically rise

Lol holy fuck you retard

Awful idea. Nobody is going to watch a fucking Ayn Rand movie. You'd be laughed out of the studio.

All of those countries saw their greatest economic growth when their economies were less regulated/barely regulated at all. America, the Scandinavian countries, and western Europe were the primary examples of capitalism in the world. All the regulation you see now is a product of the last few decades, and sure enough, that's when you first started to see the problems people complain about today.

I disagree pretty much for the reasons I described above: Problems didn't really arise until regulations, excessive spending, and wealth redistribution halted our economic growth. Now that's not to say I don't think we should have a government at all, but until the government got involved in the economy, America was seeing poverty levels drop at a rate that was unprecedented in all of human history.

>dude my shitty blog proves somalia is a free market

They don't even have a government to enforce private property laws and contacts and it's impossible to set up a business there without getting killed
How is this anything close to a free market?

Do you leftists all have downs syndrome or something? lmao

>and it's impossible to set up a business there without getting killed

This IS the free market, idiot.

You don't like gubbimint? enjoy your anarchy, faggot.

The distribution of wealth doesn't affect inflation that much. In fact, after the freer markrets were introduced in Argentina inflation rose incredibly sharply until the economy crashed.
>Their free markets are too free so it's not a free market
How is it not a free market? This is literally the exact type of scenario that Ayn Rand is suggesting.

Also, why do you keep using ad hominems? Are you like 16?

refute any point he made

>being this butthurt
nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Cost-of-living/Local-purchasing-power

You aren't making conservatives look very bright right now.

Ayn Rand was a minarchist, not an anarchocapitalist.

I mean, putting aside that you picked oyur own very specific metric, you still understand that the Swiss wealth model is unsustainable on a general level right? This is why it "works" there, but not in less finance-based countries, like all of latin america