The Ayn Rand Institute backs away from it’s previous stance of being complete bastards.

by alphamonkey on January 12, 2005 · 4 comments

in News,Stupid People

You’ll like this one, Good Reverend:

On January 7th, the brillant minds over at the Ayn Rand Institute issued an editoral wholeheartedly condeming the US Government’s use of ‘taxpayer’s money’ to fun aid relief efforts for the victims of the Asian tsunami.  Kudos to you for taking the stance that those filthy foreigner’s don’t deserve any of our hard earned money just because Mother Nature decided to take out 150,000 of them!  But oh….then you had to go and be complete sissies and backpedal like Southern politician at a Klan rally!

Apparently, as long as the money is given ”in the name of the potential value that another human being represents“ Uncle Sam can throw it around like a fat man at the strip club.  In your face, altruism!  And of course, the press release goes on to state that in addition to creating a perfect capitalist society in which the taxless government only functions as the police and the military (How would that get paid for, by the way?), the Ayn Rand Institute is working to kick hobos in the nuts and to set fire to your grandmother.

Long Live Ayn Rand! 

  • Reddit
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Digg
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Posterous
  • Tumblr


1 The Good Reverend January 12, 2005 at 7:16 pm

Actually, the article (which I found kind of pathetic for its backpeddling nature) made an excellent point.  And lest anyone reading this make a snap judgment that I want to push grandmas into ditches or shoot babies out of cannons, I will preface this by saying I made a personal donation to the UNICEF tsunami relief fund.  My views on government donations are a completely separate issue from my views on personal responsibility toward others.

Our govt. was not set up to be a charity organization.  Plain and simple.  As pertains to other countries, it was basically set up to protect the borders.  Now, the case could be made that by not donating a penny as a nation to the fund, we would be hurting international relations and thus endangering national security.  So, in that case the donation would be in accordance with the govt.’s mandate.  But just taking our tax dollars and handing it out to other countries as good will is not in the mandate.

Don’t get me wrong – I’m glad we made a donation as a country.  We’re a nation of greedy, self-centered assholes to a great extent.  For all the lip service that has been paid to the victims of the tsunami, I would wager money that less than 1 in 5 American adults actually picked up a goddamned phone or went to a website and actually made a donation.  So, on some level I’m glad our govt. said “guess what, you’re all making a donation whether you like it or not”.  However, I do completely see ARI’s point.  It really is none of the government’s business to collect tax dollars in order to make charitable donations to other countries.

2 .alphamonkey. January 12, 2005 at 7:32 pm

The government does not ‘collect tax dollars in order to make charitable donations’, but I suspect you know that.  I for one have no problem with our government giving aid to countries in need. After all, that is what civilized nations are supposed to do.

3 The Good Reverend January 13, 2005 at 3:12 pm

the govt. collects taxes to pay for government functions.  Money is spent on our national defense, therefore it collects tax dollars “in order to pay for our national defense”.  Money is spent on medicare, ergo “in order to pay for our medicare system”.  Money is spent on charitable donations to other countries, ergo the govt. “collects tax dollars in order to make charitable donations”.  We frequently donate or loan money to other countries; so tax dollars are collected in order to do that… among manifold other things.  It’s semantics, but my original statement is correct.

And as I stated above, I have no problem with the donation either.  I am merely saying that ARI has a point.  Our federal govt. is not mandated to do that – giving relief money to other countries is one of a bazillion examples of the fed govt. overstepping its bounds.  Unlike many of their other instances though, I am perfectly fine with this one.

4 japhy January 16, 2005 at 7:16 pm

this is my first comment and i think it will piss off some people already… (sorry if it’s like that, i don’t wanna offend just pointin out some issues that seems quite important)

I’m from an european country (this is also a preventive apology for the english mistakes), but i lived all around the world, US too. Here the problem was who gaved the most, and who arrived first on site, to show others who’s good and who’s better… pathetic.

sorry back on topic the comment by The Good Reverend: money is spent on our national defence, ermm where? how? and how much of it?

did you thought that maybe is better that your taxes goes toward an orphan or to a family that got nothing left than that into some ammo for iraq? maybe you could consider it a cheap shot, ok not for iraq… your taxes money goin into the installment of your great commander W… how many millions is he spendin on that?

he generously took out of his pocket 10000$ for aidin the misfortuned… cuuuute

but is not the only one doin dirty tricks, in italy the public money destined for asia are taken by the one supposed to go for africa cooperation… and from first hand stories you cannot imagine how many people is makin huge ammounts of cash out of the “helping”

(besides, there is also a donation by Micheal Schumacher, the F1 pilot, bout 10 million $)

this situation is showin the best and the worse of the human kind. but another fast critic to your comments Reverend, did you notice the cuts made are on health care, welfare etc and the “national security” budget is untouched?

dont get me wrong i’m not having a go at you, i’m sure we share many of this points, but i can’t see why the country is not mandated to do that. let me ask you something, the govt asked your or someone else’s permission to “export democracy”? (and obviously spend a “fair” ammount to do that)

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: