I just finished this video.
Watch it.
http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reg_ls_atlas
http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reg_ls_atlas
or try the copy and paste method
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
The Third Option
For as long as I can remember, as far back as any memory of mine goes, I have always heard the words of damnation of selfishness (as defined by those who damn it), and the praise for the virtuosness of self-sacrifice. These two words, selfishness (as defined by those who damn it) and self-sacrifice, are the "definitions" of the words, Take and Give.
Take and Give are mainly religious terms; started by men of religion, used mostly by those of religion, and given "definition to" by those of religion.
Take is defined by a man of their idea of selfishness. They see it as immorality. To them, selfishness is taking. Taking is just that. Taking. I will never dispute that taking is taking. Taking is taking something from someone or something, anything at all. I often times hear myself referred to as someone who takes and takes and takes, as well as hearing it from friends and parents and anyone who attends church. All through my childhood, I heard my parents say, "All that child does is take and take and take, and never ever gives anything in return". Yes, I do have a problem with actually taking from someone. Taking, as it should be defined, is similar to stealing. It is placing in your possession something that is not yours, and most likely, soemthing that was someone else'. It is taking wihout that persons consent.
Then there is giving. Giving to them is what is noble, virtuous, and morally sound. To give to someone is also known as charity. I wont argue against you if you feel the need to give to someone else, be charitable all you wont and I will only ever directly dispute charity with you if you decide to try to force me to be charitable (hmmm... kinda like government and taxes...) or try to argue it with me. Giving and charity are two things that most people probably understabd by now. They are offering something of yours to something or someone else without getting something in return.
There are even things that are known as "give and take relationships". No. The relationship referred to as a "give and take relationship" are actually what is my third option, the option that is the actual form of selfishness as defined by rationality, not superstition.
The Third Option
This is the third option. It is not give, nor is it take. In fact, it is the opposite of both of those. it is, MAKE.
Yes indeed, there is a third option known as make. You cannot form a successful company off of constantly taking from other people or other companies. IT may last for awhile, possibly even your entire lifetime. But eventually, the company will run out of things to take from. You cannot form a company off of giving. Hell, you can't even START a company PERIOD off of giving. That is a charity organization or a non-profit organization. To own a successful company, you must be able to make, produce, create a product that is needed, a product that you sell for a price. You are not taking peoples money when they buy this product nor are they giving it to you. This is equivalent exchange. A beautiful way to organize a business which, when combined with the principle of MAKE, is the ingredients for a beautiful company.
At your job, you do not take money (unless your job is a burglar, in which case, that ends any possibility of an argument from that), nor do you give money for a job (that is called charity and you are most likely a volunteer). You make money at a job based off the rule of equivalent exchange. You provide the company/business that you work for with a service that they require. They then pay you money. They made money by paying you to do a job. If you are a janitor, then they made money because now they have clean bathrooms, which means more chances of customers because they feel that this environment is clean and somewhere they want to be. If you are an engineer, well, you made a product for a company which they then sell and make money from.
MAKE and EQUIVALENT EXCHANGE are what actually makes selfishness. You are making for your own benefit, or for the benefit of whatever makes you happy, which is ultimately, your own benefit. Take is theft. Give is charity.
MAKE and EQUIVALENT EXCHANGE are moral selfishness.
Take and Give are mainly religious terms; started by men of religion, used mostly by those of religion, and given "definition to" by those of religion.
Take is defined by a man of their idea of selfishness. They see it as immorality. To them, selfishness is taking. Taking is just that. Taking. I will never dispute that taking is taking. Taking is taking something from someone or something, anything at all. I often times hear myself referred to as someone who takes and takes and takes, as well as hearing it from friends and parents and anyone who attends church. All through my childhood, I heard my parents say, "All that child does is take and take and take, and never ever gives anything in return". Yes, I do have a problem with actually taking from someone. Taking, as it should be defined, is similar to stealing. It is placing in your possession something that is not yours, and most likely, soemthing that was someone else'. It is taking wihout that persons consent.
Then there is giving. Giving to them is what is noble, virtuous, and morally sound. To give to someone is also known as charity. I wont argue against you if you feel the need to give to someone else, be charitable all you wont and I will only ever directly dispute charity with you if you decide to try to force me to be charitable (hmmm... kinda like government and taxes...) or try to argue it with me. Giving and charity are two things that most people probably understabd by now. They are offering something of yours to something or someone else without getting something in return.
There are even things that are known as "give and take relationships". No. The relationship referred to as a "give and take relationship" are actually what is my third option, the option that is the actual form of selfishness as defined by rationality, not superstition.
The Third Option
This is the third option. It is not give, nor is it take. In fact, it is the opposite of both of those. it is, MAKE.
Yes indeed, there is a third option known as make. You cannot form a successful company off of constantly taking from other people or other companies. IT may last for awhile, possibly even your entire lifetime. But eventually, the company will run out of things to take from. You cannot form a company off of giving. Hell, you can't even START a company PERIOD off of giving. That is a charity organization or a non-profit organization. To own a successful company, you must be able to make, produce, create a product that is needed, a product that you sell for a price. You are not taking peoples money when they buy this product nor are they giving it to you. This is equivalent exchange. A beautiful way to organize a business which, when combined with the principle of MAKE, is the ingredients for a beautiful company.
At your job, you do not take money (unless your job is a burglar, in which case, that ends any possibility of an argument from that), nor do you give money for a job (that is called charity and you are most likely a volunteer). You make money at a job based off the rule of equivalent exchange. You provide the company/business that you work for with a service that they require. They then pay you money. They made money by paying you to do a job. If you are a janitor, then they made money because now they have clean bathrooms, which means more chances of customers because they feel that this environment is clean and somewhere they want to be. If you are an engineer, well, you made a product for a company which they then sell and make money from.
MAKE and EQUIVALENT EXCHANGE are what actually makes selfishness. You are making for your own benefit, or for the benefit of whatever makes you happy, which is ultimately, your own benefit. Take is theft. Give is charity.
MAKE and EQUIVALENT EXCHANGE are moral selfishness.
Government Health... care... reform?
For the past few months or so, there has been an increase in Pres. Obama's plan to reform health care. I have a relatively short blog about this because it is such a simply issue that its kind of sad that this health care reform is in the news at all.
First off, health care and government should never be in the same sentence unless the words "shouldn't be touched by" is placed between the two. Government has one and only one actual job that it is needed for. That is protection. To protect you from any form of a threat to individual independence and freedom.
Now, why health care is so terrible. We live in a society based off of income and outcome. You make and income at work and have an outcome from spending money on things you either want or buy. This is no different for ANYONE that WORKS. This is only ever different for welfare people or people who are supported by me (by force imposed by the government). Doctors are no exception to this rule. In fact, their income is much larger, because the demand of doctors will never run out (unless someone can figure out how to create an "invincible gene"). Doctors will always be needed as long as people are around, because people get hurt, people get sick, its just what happens and semi-unavoidable. Yes, you can do things to decrease your chances of either, but most of those of drugs that are prescribed by doctors.
So doctors are in great demand, always have been, 99% of a chance that it always will be. Why the hell would you want to work really hard, everyday, cutting people open, stitching people up, replacing organs, fixing broken bones, prescribing helpful medicine, etc etc etc! Doctors do so much for man. However, doctors do not do this stuff for free. Have you ever seen where doctors live or what doctors drive? Its amongst the best of the best. Its because doctors provide man with services that few others can. It takes a special amount of practiced skill to be a doctor. Have you ever tried stomaching the sight of blood or brains or organs?
The purpose of the health care reform is to decrease the amount of money it costs to get health care, for everyone. This is a terrible idea. Why would a doctor want to work for any less than what they make?
You get what you pay for. If you pay less for your health care because the government is forcing you to, then you are going to get crappier service. Its inevitable. There will be less doctors and more inexperienced ones. Entire hospitals may eventually shutdown because of lack of adequate income.
Talk to your state congressman, senator, representative, governor, anyone who has a direct say in this bill.
Do not let health care be reformed by the government. It is not their place to do so.
First off, health care and government should never be in the same sentence unless the words "shouldn't be touched by" is placed between the two. Government has one and only one actual job that it is needed for. That is protection. To protect you from any form of a threat to individual independence and freedom.
Now, why health care is so terrible. We live in a society based off of income and outcome. You make and income at work and have an outcome from spending money on things you either want or buy. This is no different for ANYONE that WORKS. This is only ever different for welfare people or people who are supported by me (by force imposed by the government). Doctors are no exception to this rule. In fact, their income is much larger, because the demand of doctors will never run out (unless someone can figure out how to create an "invincible gene"). Doctors will always be needed as long as people are around, because people get hurt, people get sick, its just what happens and semi-unavoidable. Yes, you can do things to decrease your chances of either, but most of those of drugs that are prescribed by doctors.
So doctors are in great demand, always have been, 99% of a chance that it always will be. Why the hell would you want to work really hard, everyday, cutting people open, stitching people up, replacing organs, fixing broken bones, prescribing helpful medicine, etc etc etc! Doctors do so much for man. However, doctors do not do this stuff for free. Have you ever seen where doctors live or what doctors drive? Its amongst the best of the best. Its because doctors provide man with services that few others can. It takes a special amount of practiced skill to be a doctor. Have you ever tried stomaching the sight of blood or brains or organs?
The purpose of the health care reform is to decrease the amount of money it costs to get health care, for everyone. This is a terrible idea. Why would a doctor want to work for any less than what they make?
You get what you pay for. If you pay less for your health care because the government is forcing you to, then you are going to get crappier service. Its inevitable. There will be less doctors and more inexperienced ones. Entire hospitals may eventually shutdown because of lack of adequate income.
Talk to your state congressman, senator, representative, governor, anyone who has a direct say in this bill.
Do not let health care be reformed by the government. It is not their place to do so.
Avid "pay-for-what-you-get"er,
Chandler Swank
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
