1.  Using the novel "Atlas Shrugged" as a point of reference:  Is Kenneth Lay (former CEO of Enron) most like the fictional character Francisco d'Aconia, James Taggart or Dagny Taggart?  If so, why?

2.  In regards to our economy and politcial situation:  Has Atlas shrugged?  Why or why not?

The leaders of the various giant industrial companies are gov't loving pseudo-socialists almost to a man.  There are no John Galts to quit the positions like in the book.  In the end, the motor of the world will stop, but I have serious doubts about anyone popping up out of "Galt's Gulch" to rebuild.

:-/

You might get more votes if you opened the poll up to non-Objectivists who still think that Rand's philosophy was a pretty nifty construct, even if neither it nor she was perfekt.

BTW, I threw in a vote on that basis.


Atlas obviously hasn't shrugged.  There are still many capable people earnestly beavering away.  That was one of Rand's worst failings -- the refusal to see, or at least to acknowledge, that there is no one-or-the-other dichotomy between being a worker and being a looter.

Whats a Randian Objectivist? [thinking]

James Taggart..

and he hasn't yet...but it's getting worse every year.

I'm with 71-Hour Achmed.

While I'm very fond of Ayn Rand's works I can't wholly devote myself to Objectivism.  Certainly everything is something, however the either-or dualism that eminates from her mechanistic use of formal logic leaves me cold.  You're either a mover or a looter.  Don't get me wrong, I'm an adherent of formal logic and I do agree with Rand that post-modern culture has woefully abandoned it.  However, one can find "holes" in Rand's logic from time to time.

I guess what I'm saying is that no, Atlas won't shrug.  The leaders of industry and commerce will simply bow to the social-democracy simply because their boards and CEO's already hold those collectivist views.  They'll keep plugging away while the politicians keep whipping the public up in a frenzy by promising to take more from the productive in order to support the non-productive... for the children.

Perhaps Ken Lay really is James Taggart?

Still gets me.  Love Rands Works. Didn't vote. In the end who cares what Kenneth Lay is. He doesn't matter. But this comparison can be made.

Hank Rearden is to J Paul Getty as Kenneth Lay is to Dr. "Good and Evil don't exist" Pricthert.  Some things Kenneth Lay did are not against the law, some of them were shrewed. But A company that does nothing but invest in futures and owns one pipeline can't last forever. It was stagnat, had no oil itself and was traiding for billions of dollars and the Pipeline itself would probably only fetch $100,000,000.00  Maybe. But even none of this matters. What does Matter is that from now on.

THE GOVERNMENT WILL TAKE MORE FREEDOM (PRIVACY) AWAY FROM ALL Corporations. And that is wrong.
IN THE BEGINNING Corporations didn't have to file SEC reports, They didn't have to tell the public anything at all.   Now what you got is worse, and maybe responsible for the use of language that is ambigious by large corporations, the pie in the sky BULLSHIT that is put on many SEC fillings is funny.  And it does more damage then not saying anything. Because then the Stock buying public doesn't have to see for themselves what a company is all about. They just look at those SEC reports and what little ability they have to judge a company for solidness and ability to create things and wealth is not even used.  I just have a hard time feeling sympathetic about this whole thing.  Instead of taking away more corporate freedom they need to invent ways for the Employed to squirrel away money in other investments.

Benjamin