Stossel: Why Hollywood Was Against the "Atlas Shrugged" Film
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 11 ก.ย. 2024
- The film adaptation of the classic Ayn Rand novel "Atlas Shrugged" is set to hit theaters soon. Why were some liberals trying to stop you from seeing this movie? John Stossel gave Sean Hannity a full report on Fox News Channel.
I'm writing this in 2023 and I'm shocked that they are discussing this as far back as 2011. Can you imagine (oh well, yes we can!) how worse it is now since Obama and now under a Biden regime? Ayn Rand really did see the future.
I just watched and thought the same thing
Almost funny to hear them talking about the debt accumulation of 10 years, while the FED is now printing the same amount in a month.
“I hate it when I predict the future with such clarity.” - Ayn Rand
Two types of people in the world:One group does independent, primary source research, questions everything they're told, questions the motivation of both advocates and critics alike, drawing intelligent conclusions,these are called free thinkers.The other group unquestioningly buys almost any nonsense,so long as it's packaged w/colorful phrases as security,safety,equality and social justice,especially if pushed by mannequins that read other peoples' writing("actors"), these are called liberals.
Anybody here after the train derailments in Ohio and Michigan?
This book could have been written yesterday as a news article!
This book is rated as the second most influential book (next to the Bible) in America, according to the Library of Congress. Even if people like it or hate it... that's pretty impressive.
Granted it is severe and bludgeons you over the head with its idealisms, but the messages and insight Ms. Rand knew about government, people, business and politics, decades before it actually unraveled in this country (and other countries), is pretty impressive.
People are denouncing this book and Ms. Rand, only because she is calling everyone out and they can't handle the truth.
boob.
That's why you don't have a decent public healthcare system and millions are dying on the streets.
It just shows how many fucking morons there are in our country
"This book is rated as the second most influential book (next to the Bible) in America, according to the Library of Congress."
No, it isn't. The Library of Congress isn't in the business of defining "influential books". It was a survey conducted for the Book of the Month Club, inviting _their members_ (and not the general public) to rank their _personally_ most influential books. Most of the books listed were the kind of middlebrow crap that the Book of the Month Club specializes in. For example, Anne Morrow Lindbergh's _The Gift of the Sea_ managed a top 10 slot merely because it had been recently republished in an anniversary edition. This wasn't a well-considered and informed look at the history of literature, which would have doubtless named far different American works (e.g. _The Sound and the Fury_ , _Moby Dick_ , etc.). It was just an opinion poll of people who wouldn't read at all if they weren't shipped books on a monthly basis.
"This book is rated as the second most influential book (next to the Bible) in America, according to the Library of Congress. Even if people like it or hate it... that's pretty impressive."
Translation: 17 out of 5000 Book of the Month club members in 1991 thought it was great.
"According to a 1991 survey done for the Library of Congress and the Book of the Month Club, Atlas Shrugged was mentioned among the books that made the most difference in the lives of 17 out of 5,000 Book-of-the-Month club members surveyed, which placed the novel between the Bible and M. Scott Peck's The Road Less Traveled."
Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Shrugged#Influence_and_legacy
When did streaming really start to take off?
Today Atlas Shrugged can be remade as a three season limited series.
Imagine each season being ten episodes long.
The series would be able to cover the book in more detail.
Would have to find someone to fund it. Like they said in the video: Hollywood didn't want to have anything to do with these films. Sad but true! So scary how real this book is. We need to bring together a group of conservative financiers to create a production company from the ground up so that America has an alternative point of view in the form of movies -- since there is already conservative radio and the internet. However, the internet is looking pretty shaky anymore with it's censorship.
@@chippledon1 Yes, but the shutdown has devastated Hollywood. Celebrities are going crazy because they're not getting any attention. It has really exposed how weak Hollywood is. Maybe to the point that they will do anything? Can conservatives quietly infiltrate Hollywood now?
I love that in the novel when someone stood against the objectivist characters' values the objectivists never yelled or argued. They knew they were right and those incapable of seeing it wouldn't be made capable through arguing or screaming. I think objectivism is beautiful in that a world where everyone believed that their success and survival was their own responsibility, and not something they should be owed by others, would be Utopian.
Which is why it’s nonsense. Utopias just by concept is nothing but idealistic nonsense. Success (whatever that is) is one thing, but if survival were not owed, then the human race would die out. Might as well bomb hospitals then. Tribes existed for a reason and people tend to help others for a reason. Religion not required either.
This is amazing that this can now be moved to the documentary section of the library.
One of the best books ever written - where are you, John Galt ?
Dead along with the bitch who wrote them into existence, fortunately.
hahaha. what a fucking joke.
I loved the book as a novel. I did not think of it as prophesy. However, it's really spot on. Unfortunately, our world has disintegrated. Like "From the Waters of Babylon," we see how consumption and greed can create chaos. We're there. It's a dangerous spot. Freedoms are imperative. And, the ones that are directly related to creativity should never be squashed by government. My mind is my own and is not owned by anyone but me. I am a faith-based person, too! Go Galt!
"The Softening."
I remember watching this episode of 'Hannity' when it first aired.
I agree with all of the points that Sean Hannity made during this segment.
Although I read it in high school, I've been listening to it recently. It is now Feb. 3, 2024. DIE (discrimination, indoctrination, exclusion) has been shoved down our throats. As well as rail accidents, we now have increasing problems with airplanes. Corporations 'feel' it is more important to hire based on skin color, gender, disabilities, etc., than merit, skills, experience, etc. Rand's dystopian vision has started, and is coming to fruition NOW.
Bidens government is the theme of this film.
Its happening right now.
Only Obama lovers would despise this movie.
They are stepping on your toes, aren't they?
Hey, Fraud, are you going to keep the stupid coming for 2015?
Well, you are coming in 2015, aren't you? I'd say your presence here confirms your statement!
Fred Atkinson And you're still aping your intellectual superiors, Fraud. It's too bad your sentence makes no sense! Keep the stupid coming Fraud.
Really? I don't keep the stupid coming. As long as you are here, the stupid has come.
Dale Bergeron Now whatever do you mean?
Ok, I'm confused... I've seen a female far-left socialist loving this book/movie... is she mad?
well she’s not self aware lol
Good movies, but it’s 2021. It has had no impact on motivating people to stop their liberties from being stripped
The fact that these movies got out to the public just goes to prove that the devil does not have full control!
Amen !!!
High Five. I'm not a liberal nor a conservative (I'm a Libertarian), and I love this book.
It's against socialism and unearned wealth. That's the idea! American freedom!! That's what I don't like about Republican and Democrat news, they over do some reviews.
I get a laugh when I hear Republicans revering Ayn Rand as some sort of conservative spokeswoman. She would probably argue that Democrats and Republicans were just two factions of the same party, and that the correct political ideology is probably Libertarianism, because I have yet to meet a Republican who doesn't relish the idea of big military and a Christian theocracy which, rationally, is a form of big government in itself. Not to mention that most Republicans follow the Reganomics model for 'free market' capitalism, which wasn't even around when Rand wrote her novels and developed her philosophy.
Antonin Gajtani
Conservatives know perfectly well what they stand for, the Constitution. Make drugs illegal is something I agree ridiculous. Its has done nothing but been a pit to throw money down, the so called "war on drugs". As for abortion and the death penalty, this is once again not a logical comparison. The death penalty is a punishment for a crime. Abortion is a punishment dealt to someone who has done nothing but is simply the victim of someones poor choices. I do not agree with abortion and believe it to be murder but I do not agree that it is a matter for the Federal government to get involved it since it does not have jurisdiction according to the Constitution. This is a matter that should have been left to the states as intended. Unfortunately the "line of logic" that you are using is an emotional one, not one based in reason and actual logic.
Really, Republicans stand for the constitution? What part of the constitution provides for fighting the Iraq and Afghanistan wars without a congressional declaration of war. What part of the constitution allows the federal government to prohibit the use of drugs (not sold interstate)? What part of the constitution allows the torture of prisoners? What part of the constitution allows indefinite detainment without a trial by jury?
+TheCBenBen & her philosophy directly inspired Satanism
James Peck I didnt say Republicans, I said Conservatives. They are two very different groups. Some republicans are conservatives, not all conservatives are republicans.
Evan Gragg
Do you actually believe your own bullshit or are you a troll?
I agree. I also feel like another focus of the book that is often ignored is that it is as much about the individual as the government. It has a huge focus on individual achievement and self-realization that is entirely independent of political issues and has a universality of theme.
I've read the book, and I love the movie.
As a Libertarian, I find myself agreeing with progressives on the big picture problems of this country - corruption, big banks/corporation control, poverty, etc. - but, it's the solutions where we head in completely opposite directions. Conservatives, I think, are harder to talk to about the big problems. They don't seem to get that big banks are the problem, they never consider talking about the Federal Reserve, or a gold standard. And telling them their foreign policy is socialism is an insult
Happening now in 2019 AOC Bernie Sanders!
now the fucking coronavirus
I bet you've never read it, Atlas shrugged is pretty damn crazy, and CAN happen.
since 1997 the pentagon has 8 trillion dollars unaccounted for mostly in no contract bids to private sector. They will not be audited.
That is 8 trillion tax dollars to debt, I'm sure being spent fairly and wisely.
The fact that this movie was invested upon by people with money, failed, and continues to be talked down on proves Ayn Rand's argument. If everyone actually thought for themselves the world would be chaotically peaceful.
I wanna see it because Quark from Star Trek: Deep Space Nine is in it.
Hollywood wasn’t against the movie. Ironically, the organization handling the movie handled both the fundraising and the production with a stunning incompetence that did little justice to the themes of the story. This clip smacks of one of the impotent looters, whingeing “nobody can blame me, if they only gave me a chance”
Well, the free market spoke. It sucks.
I keep telling you I'm on your side!Debra Wasserman-Schultz advocates NO restrictions on who can vote, no need for ID and no restrictions on mail-in ballots, etc.In other words, you go to poll, ask for ballot & vote.This allows our side to cast extra votes on behalf of those elderly, minorities & others that don't normally vote.What's wrong with you using votes not cast by your elderly neighbors. Afterall who you'll vote for somebody good, not some tea bagger. This is why we must support this
Seven seconds into him talking and he mentions "Hollywood liberals" Thats how you know it's going to be an unbiased news report.
It is Fox News, what do you expect? ;)
It's not a news show. It's an editorial show. Just like Chris Matthews. And he is not mistaken when he cites Hollywood liberals. Hollywood is insanely liberal.
trha2222: Agreed!
irresponsibly liberal.
What do you want him to say? Lol
Rand had plenty of opportunity to get this film done right during her lifetime. And she blew it. Then . . . she left her hard-earned estate to an incompetent who sold the movie rights to other incompetents. Her bad again. Result: this gawd awful excuse for a film.
The tea party is the one that makes the most sense. They don't want the government infringing on their rights to guns abortions gay sex and drugs. The fact that they're dissolutioned into believing they're free thinkers is irrelevant.
define, "free thinker".
Temptous2112 I meant Libertarians.. I screwed that statement up so I had that cumming alby ron. ...
The bailout of GM was nowhere close to "socialist," and even the economists of the right agree it was needed and worked.Unions are not REMOTELY "bad" we all benefit from them unless you want to be a slave, give up any vacation time, protection for your safety, the 40 hour week and 5 day week. And NO India is NOT socialist, nor are workers better off ANYWHERE without unions, only the greedy CEOs and corporations, that's NOT "better off" for the nation.
Nothing to do with the film being extremely boring then? Weird how those libs stopped the public going to the cinemas to watch it, ain't it?
It was not boring. It was very exciting to the very end. You are a socialist. Of course it would seem boring to you.
ImaSkankyHo The book is one of the most popular of all time. The movie was a flop. Socialist intervention had nothing to do with it.
+tsdon1 It does all the time-and this was just another of these.
It's a shame the movie itself was mediocre. I loved the book, and had great hope for the movie. Dud.
So Hollywood was against making a movie...that it made. Because it was forced to make it by...something. Somehow.
Money
"VERY child has the right to educational opportunity"
And every child has a right to eat. But that doesn't mean government should run grocery stores. A right, means no one can deny something, it doesn't mean that it must be provided.
"ducation is NOT inexpensive for the disabled or the needy,"
Only if you don't understand economics. Two children in private school can be taught for the cost of one in a public school.
Vlad, there is no need for a comma after the word "prostitute". Sentences start with capital letters. you have an extra "the" after the word "but".
Here's the point: you don't get to sling mud until you get your own 'stuff' together. Stossel is not my favorite human being, but it appears to me that he is a long way from being a moron. You, on the other hand, cannot compose an ordinary sentence.
Being charitable, I will assume that English is probably not your native tongue. That's fine and I thank you for making the effort to communicate in the only language in which I am fluent.
However, there is an American idiom that refers to people "living in glass houses" which suggests that they should not throw stones at others. Stossel has worked his way up the corporate food chain. He's had crappy assignments and he's had a few good breaks. He's earned the right to speak his mind over the airwaves and via internet because he's proven that he has a good mind and can articulate thoughts clearly.
You, on the other hand, are still struggling with English.
Disagree with Stossel on his facts, if you wish, but you have no standing to attempt to assassinate his character or demean his accomplishments.
So Congress acting in concert with the President are incapable of violating the Constitution? Surely you aren't arguing that Congress' consent is all that is required for an action to be constitutional. Many acts of Congress and of Presidents have been voided as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, which has itself occasionally upheld plainly unconstitutional actions and legislation, demonstrating that it too is subject to human fallibility. Placing faith in those who seek power is folly.
Very few societies tolerate anyone or anything that designates their flaws and shortcomings, that's why.
Steinbeck might have won a Nobel prize for the Grapes of Wrath, but hey, we prefer Miley Cyrus twerking right?
Side note; I hate politics, because it hates me thinking.
_"I hate politics, because it hates me thinking."_
That's awesome, I might have to borrow that sometime!
Reminded me of something I heard a while ago (and I wish I could remember who so I could attribute it) for anyone fed up with politics because all parties seem as bad as each other...
"I still vote anyway, for the same reason I would punch a grizzly bear which is attacking me. It probably won't do much good, but at least I'm not doing nothing."
No, you're missing the bigger point: Government ALWAYS goes too far. Regulate a little? They can't do it. Regulate everything? That's more like it...
Ayn Rand was a very confused individual she thought existence existed. Everyone knows that when the last person leaves a room that that room ceases to exist.
Yes, it DOES mean that society should provide food or food services like SNAP for every person, in particular every child.
And yes, it DOES mean we have a responsibility to provide that educational opportunity for EVERY child whose family doesn't choose to send them to private school or to home school. YES it MUST be provided, that is the ONLY way the opportunity will be there, and has been proven to be the best way to do so.
The movie is incredible! My husband and I loved it. I have a Masters Degree in Economic theory and he is a Pharmacist so I think this movie would appeal to the more educated viewer! I thought the book sucked when I read it years ago but the movie is excellent!
What on-line degree mill did you get your "masters" at? I say this because you obviously learned nothing about artistry or culture from your alleged "education". If you had, you would know that this film (and the novel it's based on are rubbish. Check this out (don't let the many big words used here discourage you).....www.nationalreview.com/articles/222482/big-sister-watching-you/flashback/page/0/2
People simply do not understand that the point of Atlas Shrugged is, Free people produce and free people make the economy work, All government does is STEAL! Free people will take care of themselves. Jealous people work harder to steal then if they worked to produce. Real education understands the point of this movie and book.
I clearly stated that that only registered Nazi voters were eligible to receive benefits from these social programs. Not "social programs" but social programs since that is exactly what they were. Furthermore, the point of my comment was to illustrate how the Nazi's were NOT socialists and that their use of the word socialism in their party name pertained to their adoption of social programs which alone hardly makes a socialist.
5:15 Nice to mention at the end of the converstain you're gonna view the movie you just reviewed.
The only difference between $8 mimum wage and $100 min. Is how many people will be unemployed as a result, how many businesses (that hire), will not be able to do business in the market, and how much costs of goods sold (which affect the poor the most) will cost.
"NLY for a decent living wage for workers,"
And who decides what is decent, that should be the workers themselves. And what is decent about employment? If there was zero unemployment, there might be SOME legitimacy to what you say.
This movie is the wet deam of fox news...
and anyone who has read a book.
Darryl Young I've read plenty of books; this movie seems boring and trite.
yes it is, but to hear the words spoken sends a thrill down my spine.
Kindof interesting that Armin Shimerman is in this movie, since he was the voice of Andrew Ryan, a character largely inspired by the writing of...Ayn Rand.
Its funny how Stossel and Hannity try to portray themselves as the modern-day protagonists of the story.... when it reality, they are plain douchebags
Though, just imagine this movie with Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie ... sublime!
+Borislav Smilev What is a douchebag?
+Borislav Smilev
You said nothing. Are you a recent college graduate?
It's what he sees whenever he looks in a mirror.
Isn't Atlas Shrugged a blueprint/codebook, not a telling of the future, but how they want the future to unfold. It wasn't supposed to be revealed to the general public.
The first movie sucked. The 2nd and 3rd were god AWFUL.
SuperGhettoBob Read the book instead. A billion times better than the movie - as is always the case.
Only because leftist fought it. They did everything possible to stop it. The left can not handle the truth. Capitalism works until government interferes.
Hey I'm on your side comrade.My ancestors were"helping" get big city Democrats elected since the '20.Ever hear of the"Purple Gang".
We both agree there must be a final solution to the tea baggers and other conservatives so our utopian socialist state can occur.
Unfortunately we're still in minority compared to knuckle dragging tea baggers so enhancing vote("vote early & often")is an acceptable tactic since we still can't win w/ regular votes.
Keep eye on goal.
Imagine: NO CONSERVATIVES!
Actually, Atlas Shrugged was almost made with a large budget and a name cast. That fell apart, and this movie was rushed into production to avoid losing the rights. It has nothing to do with "Liberal Hollywood" but rather, just Regular Hollywood.
Ayn Rand, to me, was an alarmist philosopher who wrote fantasy novels just to entertain conservatives like Tom Clancy and all the other right-wing ilk. I hated her for that and about her other views on feminism as well.
The irony here is incredible! The movie didn't get made for a long time because it wasn't going to make any money and low and behold it didn't. They're shitting on Hollywood for not wanting to make a movie about free market capitalism, while Hollywood's reason for not making the movie can be easily tied to the same thing. The ignorance is a spectacular sight!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Ayn Rand ended up being a Welfare Queen when she was diagnosed with lung cancer and DEMANDED that the government help her!
Considering the taxes she payed through her life to be spent on anti-people atrocities like contemporary "Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Division of the IRS" and many more I would call it tiny reparation.
Umm...she enrolled in Social Security and Medicare. She paid for those all of her life. YOU are a MORON.
Did she not claim any kind of social welfare is a crime against humanity? Both these programs are heavily subsidized by taxes.
By taxes she paid on her income, she was quite wealthy, remeber ?
It has nothing to do with the book's ideology. Despite Hollywood's percieved 'liberal politics' the fact is that ALL films in the USA are made by businessmen. If they thought there was enough of an audience for 'Atlas Shrugged' as a film they would have put $100M behind it (which is probably what it would have needed to be true to the book).
That's a truly despicable notion. EVERY child has the right to educational opportunity, it should not depend on giveaways, but a strong public education system where EVERY kid has a chance is the only proper way. And, again, we ALL benefit from an educated populace. Education is NOT inexpensive for the disabled or the needy, that you think it's easy and cheap shows you know absolutely nothing whatsoever about schools or education except what you've been fed by the far right.
A funny similarity: in my country some guys wanted to make a movie about opressive bureaucrats and how they are ruining private firms. Guess what-nobody wanted to help them make this movie, till conservative newspaper have made this public and a lot of people from business circles have invested in it. And despite all the oposition from artists and movie institutions (yes, all controlled by the state) it is going to be made.
I have to ask: which corporations are "running" the government?
Why do you assume corporations necessarily support free markets?
Producers had trouble getting it made because it had a piss poor script, zero actors of any note who had expressed real interest in it and had a $20 million dollar budget. Hollywood is a business. Most of the studios believed Atlas Shrugged to be a lousy product, and they were absolutely correct.
Isn't it ironic that the when ordinary people don't succeed that objectivists/libertarians are so quick to call them lazy and unproductive but when their own product can't get financed and (continued)
And of course it's beyond idiocy to think that the ONLY choices are no minimum wage or 1000 dollars an hour.
"It's morally reprehensible to have kids if they can't care for them" a remarkable statement given the right's vicious attacks on women's right to choose, but no it's not "immoral" for poor people to have children, our SOCIETY should be far more responsible in helping meet their needs. That you think we should let them starve to discourage "Illegitimacy" is what's truly perverse.
I have two types of cancer. No government can stop me from eating weed.
Stossel for prez, Swann for Vice Pres, Ron Paul for new Chairman of the Fed!
No... The reason that marijuana was outlawed is because the tobacco industry was losing money to the pot growers. The tobacco industry had a lobby and marijuana growers didn't. Big tobacco lied about how bad pot was and hid the truth about their own product.
That's flat out untrue, I'm not remotely "closed-minded" just because I won't swallow lies. No, disagreeing is NOT an attack, an attack is an attack.
And I don't need "job applications," I've had the same career for over 30 years. I do fine, but that's far from the purpose of the human life.
Modern day Russians refer to the old Soviet Communists as fascists. Word "fascist" derives from the Latin word fasciae, meaning to bind together, and could be interchangeable with totalitarianism. "Right & left" are antiquated terms of 20th Century, more to describe intended alliances than anything more noble.Sadly,contemporary people still try to use these meaningless labels to condemn or condone a regime or an oligarch.I usually ignore the flowery prose of the tyrant who in end still oppresses
Rand was a dreadful novelist; her characters are caricatures. I've always been amused that libertarians think it reasonable for an architect to blow up a building because he believes his labor to have been corruptly used. Imagine a world full of people like Roark.
Dream about it every day. When I was young I lived in a world such as that, America before the looters, Marxists, "liberals" and SJWS . And I am homesick.
Why does Hannity support this book yet hate Ron Paul so much? Especially when Ron Paul would support him cutting down his tree because he understands property rights.
Atlas Shrugged was a GREAT film!!!
No freedom means I can freely take your property. You are clearly telling me I can't do something by marking it as owned. Who told you that you could own anything?
No corruption is someone in a position of authority using that position to gain a personal advantage, eg a cash bribe, skimming funds for personal use, inserting relatives into subordinate positions at the expense of better candidates, awarding contracts for supplies to an entity you have a direct share of ownership.
You're describing dissatisfaction with a system you view through personal bias. That's not corruption.
Do any of these conservatives who claim to love this book ever figure out that Rand blames Christianity as the cause of looting.... that Galt specifically cites Original Sin as the most hateful concept ever?
In a free market, high markup results in new competition. Government limits the number colleges by numerous means. Some colleges have high tuition because they are prestigious, but many colleges and especially trade schools are affordable.
My college was paid for, by the business I ended up working for. If the cost was too high for that business, they would not have paid it. But government gets all the money it wants by theft and cost does not factor.
I love this myth of 'Liberal' Hollywood.
Hollywood is a total company town, run by businessmen with the sole purpose of making as much money as possible.
That's contradicting Rand's philosophy that no man should rule over another man.
I find that many people who have been taught that others must be sacrificed for various greater goods actively hate Rand's book and this movie. No wonder the world is a mess.
It's so refreshing to have Stossel and Hannity explaining how big capitalists have no say in government. Oh, I'm sorry, I slipped into their parallel universe for a second.
"Fascism" with a capitol "f" is a specific political party started by a former member of the Italian Socialist Party, Mussolini.His social security program was adopted by Roosevelt, and until 1936 invasion of Ethiopia, was held in high regard in US.Abandonment by West sent him to Hitler.Oddly, likes of Joe Kennedy & British elite, felt that Hitler was a "positive" force to ally with. Fascism with a small "f", long predates & doesn't describe a particular party, but how an oligarch imposes rule.
I was just explaining why it was outlawed. I agree, pot should be legalized. It has way more benefit than harm; as you mentioned, it is not just medical, but has many different uses. There have been many arguments about it over the years, but it was the tobacco industry's faulty statistics about how much harm it caused that gave legislatures the motive to outlaw it.
In public schools teachers pay does not correlate with cost per student. You do the math. In private schools teachers pay is entirely dependent on how good of a job they do.
"by denying education to the disabled and kids from poor families"
I would not be denying anyone anything. It would be entirely their decision on how the child should be educated. If society thinks it is important, then charities would be established. Especially now with internet, education could be very inexpensive.
Government intervention isn't the problem, far too LITTLE is the problem. Greed is the problem.
That's idiocy, of course. Minimum wage laws do NOT hurt workers IN THE SLIGHTEST. Corporate greed hurts workers. NOBODY is "worth less than minimum wage." Our minimum wage is FAR below the poverty level a person working full time should be able to feed their damn family.
You place the "value" of labor ONLY based upon the greed of the corporation, which will NEVER value work at any level above the lowest they can get away with.
I thought the reason these films almost did not get made was because movies cost money and there is barely a market?
I don't really have any problem with Rand signing up for and receiving the social security and medicare benefits due her. I find it interesting that she collected those benefits under a different name. Furthermore if Rand's economic principles were so sound she wouldn't have needed the government benefits and should have been independently wealthy.
notice how many time obama says he is going to "let" us do something as if he could take it away.
The term fascism does not date back to ancient Rome.
I would say a big reason the movie failed was because of the awkward chemistry between the two leads, to the point that when there was finally a love scene it was like watching two magnets with Aspergers clink together.
Moussolini was the head of the Italian Socialist Party before splintering off to form the Fascist party.He defined Fascism as abandoning the backwardness of the right while not following the destructiveness of the left.This was called at time the "Third Way."(Wiki definition)
", of course. Minimum wage laws do NOT hurt workers "
Cool, we should then raise minimum wage to $1000 dollars an hour, everyone will be RICH, RICH, RICH!
Starting a family is a choice, it is morally reprehensible for someone to have kids if they are not capable of taking care of them. Funny fact that illegitimacy is correlated with government welfare, because institutional welfare creates perverse incentives.
The irony of this movie would be if it was funded by TARPed banks
You're thinking of the crony companies reliant upon government for their existence, which is the antithesis of what should make for a successful company. Take away government interference, subsidies, exclusivities, preferences, corruption, licences, and companies would need to go back to how they all started in the first place: Providing a good or service to a customer at a competetive price in a free market where a competitor's price keeps them honest, rather than govt protecting them.
The idea that government can benefit anyone, is only as true as a thief benefits whoever he pawns the loot to, and who he spends the money on, and himself. But the thief's actions makes society on a whole, poorer.
Just because the novel has polemic value does not mean that a good movie was made from it. Why not discuss the ineptness of the direction, the acting and the script apart from the narrative content?
I am aware that teachers are badly underpaid and that it's destructive and stupid for our nation to not pay teachers better. This stat is absolutely meaningless, teachers are PROFESSIONALS and SHOULD be paid as such. The problem of underpaying other working people is not solved in the slightest by further screwing teachers or blaming them for something they have nothing to do with at all, except providing an opportunity for the kids of those underpaid people to have a chance at a better life.
Without public schools, Charities and grants would exist to a greater degree for education, because it is in the best interest of businesses to have an educated workforce. Just as there are grants for college. In this sense, taxes applied to schooling are subsidies to the rich, not the poor.
So what you're saying is that you can't disprove that she did or didn't know what she was talking about and you can't refute the truth of the philosophy she spoke.
Don't cloud the issue with fact! Just because Hitler was an anti-gun, bisexual, vegetarian, atheist who believed everything ultimately belonged to the Reich doesn't mean he bears any resemblance to the modern antigun, bisexual vegetarian, atheist who believes everything belongs to the state and labels himself a "socialist".