The Last Capitalist

A site dedicated to restoring individualism in the United States of America

Archive for the ‘laissaz-faire capitalism’ Category

Back Again

Posted by jemartynowski on November 30, 2009

Well, it’s been forever, but I need to make a comeback.   There have been so many things that go against what I believe coming to the forefront of politics and the news recently that it was almost an overload.

Now, it’s time to wise up.   Stop being one of those people who doesn’t think you need to actually use your freaking brain.

I’ve seen a disturbing trend recently when looking for opposing viewpoints to read to edumacate myself:   There is no opposing argument.   No, it’s not that there aren’t any people out there calling capitalism and objectivism stupid.   It’s just that they don’t bother to tell you why.

The opposition to capitalism can be summed up by this exchange:

Collectivist:   Capitalism is obviously stupid.  Whoever still believes in it is a dumb poop-head.
Objectivist:   Why?
Collectivist:   If you don’t already know than you’re obviously too dumb to get it.   Idiot.
Objectivist:   Umm, OK.

I hate collectivism.   But what I hate even more is when someone has an opposing viewpoint but refuses to make an argument for it.  Am I missing something?   If you really believe something, wouldn’t you try to educate someone who doesn’t get it?

Anybody see the same things I’m seeing?  Anything different?   Anything at all?


Posted in laissaz-faire capitalism | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

A Word On Honduras

Posted by jemartynowski on June 29, 2009

Maybe I’m confused.  President Obama, Hill-Dawg, and many other Socialist leaders in the Americas are calling for the restoration of former Honduras President Mel Zelaya to office.  Now, I understand the other tyrants asking for this, but the President of the United States?  He should be supporting, at the very least, the constitutional authority of the government of Honduras to remove a person from office who is clearly trying to violate the constitution. 

Most of these voices against the coup are claiming they want an end to the old, violent past of the region and that this just sets them all back.  However, we are missing some serious points here.  First, Zelaya was not taken prisoner, tortured and killed.  He was merely removed.  There was no bloodshed.  The only blood that could be spilled is if Dictator For Life Chavez instigates some violence  Second, why has President Obama claimed that Zelaya’s removal was illegal?  As a matter of fact, the only reason he was removed is because HE was doing something illegal.  He was trying to pull a Chavez and all the other dictators of the area and extend his term in office.  Shouldn’t we be all outraged over that?  Don’t get me wrong, maybe this coup wasn’t the only way to go about it, but shouldn’t we be thankful for the lack of violence?

As a Wall Street Journal editorial put it, “The struggle against chavismo has never been about left-right politics. It is about defending the independence of institutions that keep presidents from becoming dictators. This crisis clearly delineates the problem. In failing to come to the aid of checks and balances, Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Insulza expose their true colors.”  I couldn’t agree more.  There are those in our nation who would rather see government powers expanded, and are blinded by that ideal.  They have no concerns about the people’s right to change their government when it is no longer working in the nation’s best interests.  Obama and Hillary should read the Declaration of Independence.  It goes against everything for which they stand.

Posted in laissaz-faire capitalism, Socialism and Democrats | Tagged: , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Government Takes Huge Step Towards Owning Everything

Posted by jemartynowski on May 20, 2009

I know my brother, my dad, and everyone else will tell me I’m stupid for supporting the free market on this one.  When they think of things like the credit card industry and how they charge huge rates on people who default or miss payments, they immediately say, “those people are getting screwed.”  So obviously, it must be good, in their eyes, that the government is stepping WAY beyond their constitutional authority to regulate the credit market.  They are protecting the innocent civilians.

This thinking is why we are on a straight track toward fascism.  We cannot expect the government to come in and fix all of our problems.  If we are stupid enough to screw up a credit card or miss a payment on something, there is a reason they make us pay those huge rates.  If they do not, the company loses money.  Lots of it.  Now, we all know these companies are not going to lose the money the government is telling them to lose.  They are not in the business of charity.   What does this mean for you, the timely-paying, upstanding credit customer?

You are paying more.  From now on, you will have to pay more to borrow, which means you will probably do less of it.  Which means the economy will not have you contributing as much as you have in the past.  It also means, if you are a business owner, you will have less money for innovation.  It means, if credit is cheaper to those who default more, they will borrow more, which is obviously bad for the economy.

When the government interferes, they make things worse.  The world is not perfect.  It never will be.  But every time the president says, “we have to…” insert thing here, he’s trying to stifle the free market.  And when he does that, he only creates a situation that needs more regulation.  And more.  And more. 

The free market may allow for some people to get completely screwed, and I do in fact feel sorry for those people.  But I ask you this:  is it better to save some people from bad credit than to live in a country that does not allow for innovation, stifles creativity, and eventually squashes the individual? 

Sadly, I think I know the answer many people would give.

Posted in Capitalism and Politics, laissaz-faire capitalism, Socialism and Democrats | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Daily(ish) Ayn Rand Quote is Back!

Posted by jemartynowski on April 20, 2009

Be it a highwayman who confronts a traveler with the ultimatum: “Your money or your life,” or a politician who confronts a country with the ultimatum: “Your children’s education or your life,” the meaning of that ultimatum is: “Your mind or your life”—and neither is possible to man without the other.

-From For the New Intellectual by Ayn Rand

This is one of my favorite quotes because it points out the complete nonsense that is our government today.  Those in power say to you, “we need this or that, because it is obviously good.”  The problem is that the things they say are needed aren’t necessarily best done by the government.  Plus, by forcing us to accept their opinion of the matter, they are not allowing us to use our own mind by threat of force against our body.  Without one, there cannot be the other. 

Also what I like about it is the use of education as the “obvious” good.  It’s commonly used as a reason to force us to give something up.  Obviously, we all want our kids to be smarter.  How can something trying to achieve that be bad?  Well, when it can only be accomplished by threatening force against individuals for not paying for it, that’s how.

If we logically thought about it, without government forcing education on us, would our kids all be dumb?  No, of course not.  We would find a way to privately fund and push for our kids to be smarter, or at least better prepared to enter the world as a productive individual.  Stop using education as a reason to steal from me,  or I’ll kick your ass.  (See what I did there?)

Posted in Capitalism and Politics, laissaz-faire capitalism | Tagged: , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Daily(ish) Ayn Rand Quote

Posted by jemartynowski on March 17, 2009

Observe the nature of today’s alleged peace movements. Professing love and concern for the survival of mankind, they keep screaming that the nuclear-weapons race should be stopped, that armed force should be abolished as a means of settling disputes among nations, and that war should be outlawed in the name of humanity. Yet these same peace movements do not oppose dictatorships; the political views of their members range through all shades of the statist spectrum, from welfare statism to socialism to fascism to communism. This means that they are opposed to the use of coercion by one nation against another, but not by the government of a nation against its own citizens; it means that they are opposed to the use of force against armed adversaries, but not against the disarmed.

-from Capitalism, The Unknown Ideal by Ayn Rand

This is a good argument to this day to the so-called “peace-loving” hippies.  Perhaps my main argument for capitalism to those illogical non-thinkers.  One cannot argue for peace and not laissez-faire capitalism.  They are one and the same.  Laissez-faire capitalism is the only social system that bans force from relationships.  THE ONLY ONE.  All others require forced submission, whether to the government, other individuals, the collective, or whatever you want to call it.  Force, not peace, is required for any other type of government.

Posted in Capitalism and Politics, laissaz-faire capitalism, Socialism and Democrats | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Daily(ish) Ayn Rand Quote 03/10/09

Posted by jemartynowski on March 10, 2009

Property rights and the right of free trade are man’s only “economic rights” (they are, in fact, political rights)—and there can be no such thing as “an economic bill of rights.” But observe that the advocates of the latter have all but destroyed the former.

-from The Virtue of Selfishness by Ayn Rand

It is funny that this “Economic Bill of Rights” that she speaks of is what the current political powers are using to justify their evil moves.  Evil, because they are eliminating rights of others to give them to those they see fit.  Nobody can say that this is alright, but they do a good job of hiding those whose rights are being imposed upon.  We make those people out to be the “rich,” when in fact it is mostly average workers.  The wealth redistribution is just so a few people have the power to decide what to do with our money.  Thanks, guys.  That really helps.

Posted in Barack Obama, laissaz-faire capitalism, Socialism and Democrats | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »