Who is John Galt?
Do you believe in Ayn Rand’s philosophy on the ethics of altruism? If each capable individual does their best to be their best by looking out for their own interest then they would fulfill their societal duty to be a productive member of society. This does not mean that you cannot or should not help others.
Looking out for your own interest and being selfish in that way does not preclude you from being generous or thoughtful. It is each one’s responsibility to achieve all that you can. Rand believed that capitalism is the morally superior economic system and that morality demands respecting the individual rights of all. Capitalism drives an economy for all to grow, socialism drives an economy for government and restrictions of freedom to grow.
Educational Videos About Money
Logic and Clarity
Wanting to know the logical truth is what drives a person to think with reason and rationale. The world would be a better place if people spent more time debating with reason and have discussions using rational arguments about issues and matters. The problem as Rauhut points out is, “The premises of an argument are the reasons you think your belief about the world is true. Good and reasonable premises for an important claim are hard to come by, since we very often know what we believe, but we often are not quite sure why we do so” (Rauhut, 2003).
Learning that it is not enough to know what we believe but that we must be able to defend our belief with logic and clarity will help to make better arguments. It is not enough to just make a statement because it seems to be true even if said with authority on the subject. Each argument must be able to pass the scrutiny test. Many times, you can simply ask someone why they believe what they believe and that will cause the person to stop and think of the reasons and sometimes decide there is no logical reason why they believe what they believe. Without a strong logical foundation of their belief some will immediately concede that their belief cannot be defended with logic and therefore is a weak statement of belief and possibly change their mind, especially if presented with reason of why their belief is not logical and cannot be defended as a truth.
However, logic needs to be consistent within the argument. Without consistency, there is contradiction. In philosophical investigation, on the other hand, the search for logical consistency becomes a driving force for innovation and philosophical progress. (Rauhut, 2003) Philosophy is, as American philosopher William James (1842-1910) pointed out, “an unusually stubborn effort to think clearly” (as cited in Rauhut, 2003).
Clear thinking allows one to see things with different possibilities and not just as they think it should be which could be based on personal biases or experiences. Thinking without preconceived ideas and opinions allows one to see possibility they could not see before with a clouded mind. Sometimes the range of possibilities can be infinite which is why logic and clarity are necessary to narrow down to what is a valid argument.
Philosophy is about arguing but with a purpose of finding the logical truths and reasonable possibilities. If one dislikes losing arguments, one ought to not get in a philosophical debate with someone who understand the concepts of philosophy as most likely they would lose the argument. However, they may gain a great deal of insight not only about their own belief systems but their world view in general.
References
Rauhut. (2003). Ultimate Questions: Thinking About Philosophy, 2nd edition.
Social Security Thoughts
Although some argue that policymakers can wait to solve our long-term entitlement problems, CBO's recent Long-Term Budget Outlook suggests otherwise. According to their projections, the Social Security program is in particular trouble -- and much worse than we thought.
According to CBO's latest projections, the trust fund will become insolvent three years earlier than what we previously thought, and its long-term funding gap is 50 percent larger (CRFB.org, 2015). After reading the foregoing statement it should be clear that the current Social Security program is not sustainable and needs reform in a big way.
When the program was put into place people’s lifespan was shorter and there were more paying in to it as compared to those drawing it as compared to today’s figures. The cost to administer the program alone is something of a waste when you consider that the money paid into social security could instead be paid to a private bank account and have similar rules as far as when a person could start drawing their funds out to insure they have money in their “golden” years.
It could work similar to the present 401k’s in as much as the employers would still need to contribute as they do today when they match an employee’s FICA and Medicare tax. As far as Medicare, you would have thought when they were busy passing laws before they read them (Affordable Care Act) they would have revised Medicare to make it more efficient and reduce the amount of fraud.
Why the people in the federal government think everything is better if they run and control it is beyond me. The private sector can run companies more efficient than the government ever could. So while I don’t have an exact solution, I still can see that something needs to be done to have Americans benefit more from the money they earn through their years of employment.
References
Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. CBO: Social Security Looks Much Worse Than We Thought. 2015. Available at: http://crfb.org/blogs/cbo-social-security-looks-much-worse-we-thought. Accessed July 25, 2015.
